This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: ICE in change_address at emit_rtl.c


> Date: Sun, 25 Nov 01 09:23:28 EST
> From: kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner)
> To: neil@daikokuya.demon.co.uk
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org

>     And why can't you look inside a temporary the same way you look inside
>     a SAVE_EXPR?

> Right now we have no mechanism for doing so.

> However, my question is what do we gain by removing SAVE_EXPR if we add
> temporaries that have exactly the same semantics?  If you do everything
> that SAVE_EXPR can do, all you've done is renamed it!

If you increase the likely hood that the compiler will just work in
the face of changing code, and random maintenance and decrease the
maintenance code, and make the code easier to read and understand,
then you gained more, than just renaming it, you've improved it.

It is reasonable to find a way to `improve' SAVE_EXPR.  Check out
UNSAVE_EXPR, and the `grossness' of it.  It is truely worth
eliminating by design.  Unfortunately to get rid of it, you need to
revamp SAVE_EXPR.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]