This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [patch] Remove unused code from dse.c.
- From: Steven Bosscher <stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- To: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Lawrence Crowl <crowl at googlers dot com>, Diego Novillo <dnovillo at google dot com>, Richard Biener <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>, gcc-patches List <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 19:12:43 +0100
- Subject: Re: [patch] Remove unused code from dse.c.
- References: <CAGqM8fZXtrCZYCXbajdmSq8-GTbVD4qr4pMT5R9DBZawp1D0oQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <51559CBF dot 5010202 at redhat dot com> <CAGqM8fZXRCVoAbEwyyVZZLZOsE0+=5VW_K1Muzho7P0YaXZqng at mail dot gmail dot com> <5155CF75 dot 70400 at redhat dot com>
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 6:29 PM, Jeff Law <law@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 03/29/2013 11:24 AM, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
>
>>> At what point did we stop setting clear_alias_sets? Was that
>>> intentional or not?
>>
>>
>> I do not know the answer to either question.
>
> That's what needs to be determined before I'll approve. It means digging a
> bit.
>
>
>
>> My view is that we have already lost the feature. The code
>> that populates the set is gone. The remaining code has probably
>> suffered bitrot because it is not being tested. Trying to recreate
>> the population will probably result in inconsistencies anyway,
>> necessitating a rewrite of the remaining code. So, the remaining
>> code has little value, and might have negative value.
>
> But that doesn't mean dropping the code is the right thing to do. The right
> thing to do is see if the feature was dropped on purpose. If so, then we
> remove this dead code. If not, then we fix the real problem, namely the
> code was accidentally disabled (and add suitable tests to the suite to catch
> this kind of problem in the future).
It's left over cleanups from code removed last year:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-03/msg01862.html
I like the patch.
Ciao!
Steven