This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Language-independent functions-as-trees representation
- From: Pop Sébastian <pop at gauvain dot u-strasbg dot fr>
- To: Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot de>
- Cc: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>, Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>,Per Bothner <per at bothner dot com>, Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>,Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 16:06:11 +0200
- Subject: Re: Language-independent functions-as-trees representation
- References: <wvllm86k1m1.fsf@prospero.cambridge.redhat.com> <u8d6theg4c.fsf@gromit.moeb>
On Sun, Jul 21, 2002 at 08:42:43AM +0200, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
> Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com> writes:
>
> > In a previous thread, Diego has suggested that inlining would be done on
> > language-dependent trees. I think this is a mistake; IMO it should be done
> > at the SIMPLE level. Requiring the inliner to know about frontend trees is
> > wrong.
>
> Inlining on SIMPLE might also allow to inline mixed languages, e.g. C
> code into Fortran.
This would require to store SIMPLE trees comming from different front-ends
then reconstruct a global tree.
(a little as the SGI's compiler works for interprocedural analysis, storing
WHIRL trees into .o files, then building the whole tree at link/optimize time).