This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: ICE in change_address at emit_rtl.c
- From: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: Neil Booth <neil at daikokuya dot demon dot co dot uk>,Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at codesourcery dot com>,"gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 16:45:04 -0800
- Subject: Re: ICE in change_address at emit_rtl.c
- References: <20011126114551.C19531@codesourcery.com> <email@example.com>
On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 11:50:10AM -0800, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> >>Patch pre-approved.
> >Neil tried to do this a few weeks back and got shot down because
> >apparently it would make trunk->branch merges harder. What has
> That I didn't see the original discussion, and therefore waded in
> with a new, unilateral decision, thinking that nobody had made a
> decision before.
> But, I justify my decision like this:
> 1. The trunk should be focused on the 3.1 release, and this field
> has no value in that release.
> 2. It is unclear that this is even the right data structure to use.
> Inflating the size of all trees, just for use during the AST
> optimization phase, is not necessarily a good design.
> 3. How much harder is the merge? The next time you merge to the
> branch, you manually keep the aux field. Then you have it
> forever more.
For the record, I agree with all of this reasoning. I just wanted to
make sure that the constituents of the ast-optimizer-branch didn't get