This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [tree-ssa] Use of build_binary_op
On Thu, 26 Sep 2002 12:43:00 +0200, Pop Sébastian <pop@gauvain.u-strasbg.fr> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 11:09:28AM +0100, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> On Thu, 26 Sep 2002 11:57:52 +0200, Pop Sébastian <pop@gauvain.u-strasbg.fr> wrote:
>>
>> > you could just say that GENERIC and GIMPLE trees are of different types.
>>
>> I don't think that's a distinction we want to describe in terms of type.
> GIMPLE is a subset of GENERIC. So GIMPLE has all the features GENERIC has,
> plus some other that are either redefined or added in extension.
> GIMPLE can be defined as a subtype of GENERIC.
It could, but I don't think it would be useful. Transformations on a
GIMPLE tree can produce something which does not satisfy the GIMPLE
constraints, and needs to be simplified again. The inliner, for example.
Jason