This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Where's the Steengaard stuff supposed to go?
- From: Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>
- To: Steven Bosscher <s dot bosscher at student dot tudelft dot nl>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 21:24:05 -0400 (EDT)
- Subject: Re: Where's the Steengaard stuff supposed to go?
On 21 Jul 2002, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> Daniel,
>
> I cannot build G95 anymore since you commited the Steengaard alias
> analysis stuff. If I link to tree-alias-steen.o, I get a number of
> errors about a missing function 'create_tmp_alias_var()',
Errr, this is defined in *-simplify.c, prototyped in tree-simple.h.
Any SIMPLE implementation is going to need it to do alias analysis, we
need to be able to create VAR_DECL's that don't get inserted into the
binding level (because we have to create them for intermediate results of
expressions that don't directly store, etc, so we end up with possibly a
lot of them).
> and if I don't
> link to it, I get a missing function error from tree-optimize.o for the
> same function (this used to work).
Which is what should happen.
>
> I tought these optimizers were supposed to work on SIMPLE, so why is
> this function specific to C?
It's not.
But since g95 isn't in the tree, how could i possibly know to add the
function for you to your *-simplify file.
> it's not, can't you move all functions
> etc related to them to a separate file?
They are.
Whatever file g95 uses that implements the functions that
c-simplify.c implements (IE the stuff defined in
tree-simple.h), should implement create_tmp_alias_var.
>
> Greetz
> Steven
>
>
>
>
>
>