This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: gcc/resource.c mark_target_live_regs Question
- To: lucier at math dot purdue dot edu
- Subject: Re: gcc/resource.c mark_target_live_regs Question
- From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 17:49:37 -0800
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Organization: CodeSourcery, LLC
- References: <200102161913.f1GJDCL26922@polya.math.purdue.edu>
>>>>> "Brad" == Brad Lucier <lucier@math.purdue.edu> writes:
Brad> I'm all for compile-time performance, especially in places
Brad> where it takes > 10 times longer than it should take (or
Brad> than it took earlier). But I'm most definitely *not* in
Brad> favor of achieving compile-time performance by using
Brad> quadratic (or worse) algorithms and then putting artificial
Brad> limiters on the amount of input data considered.
Nobody disagrees with you, in the abstract.
The point is that we don't have a choice.
Right now, we have quadratic algorithms, and no easy fix. That means
that we need limiters to achieve something reasonable in the short
term.
I'm sure that if you (or someone else) implements a more efficient
delay slot filler, it will be adopted quickly.
--
Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com