This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [patch] tree-cfg.c: Speed up cleanup_tree_cfg().
- From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- To: Giovanni Bajo <rasky at develer dot com>
- Cc: Kazu Hirata <kazu at cs dot umass dot edu>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 10:44:33 -0400
- Subject: Re: [patch] tree-cfg.c: Speed up cleanup_tree_cfg().
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <09f301c4a7c4$c8bf10d0$f503030a@mimas>
- Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
On Fri, Oct 01, 2004 at 04:41:49PM +0200, Giovanni Bajo wrote:
> Kazu Hirata wrote:
> > I am wondering if we actually need the gcc_assert(). I'll leave it up
> > to you to decide whether we should keep it.
> My understanding is that assertions which involve non trivial calculations
> should be guarded by ENABLE_CHECKING.
That's exactly what Kazu's patch does:
+ #ifdef ENABLE_CHECKING
+ if (retval)
+ gcc_assert (!cleanup_control_flow ());