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: folding STRING_CST + INTEGER_CST

From: Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at redhat dot com>
To: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk>
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 05:48:35 -0700
Subject: Re: folding STRING_CST + INTEGER_CST
References: <20020625032306.GA398@redhat.com> <Pine.LNX.4.33.0206251010460.19341-100000@kern.srcf.societies.cam.ac.uk>

On Tue, Jun 25, 2002 at 10:15:14AM +0100, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jun 2002, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> 
> > another alternative is to fold STRING_CST+INTEGER_CST when we are
> > building the trees for certain builtins accepting "const char *".  
> > the following come to mind:
> > 
> > 	strspn, strstr, strcspn, strrchr, strchr, index, fputs
> > 
> > ...since we know we don't need equality operations on them.
> 
> Some of these functions return pointers into their arguments, which may
> then get compared afterwards.

well... obviously for the ones that don't return pointers :).

anyways, i took a different approach on the tree-ssa-branch.

thanks
aldy

References:
- Re: folding STRING_CST + INTEGER_CST
  - From: Aldy Hernandez
- Re: folding STRING_CST + INTEGER_CST
  - From: Joseph S. Myers

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