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: merging for 3.4 (was Re: [Patch] Qualify min(), max() ...)


> On Wed, 04 Dec 2002, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> 
> > After that, I expect the sequence you said: BIB->mainline, the new
> > C++ parser, and then (perhaps) some tree optimizer stuff, although
> > I haven't really gotten the impression that stuff is fully ready yet.
> > 
> Whether tree SSA can be merged for 3.4 will depend on the state
> of the branch by the time the Stage 1 window closes.  We are
> making rapid progress but I would like to have the following in
> place:
> 
> - At least two front ends working.  We already have C and it
>   looks like C++ is getting there.
> 
> 
> - General acceptance for GENERIC and GIMPLE.  GENERIC will impact
>   all the front ends, as we need every front end to emit GENERIC
>   so that it can then be converted into GIMPLE, which is the IL
>   that all the tree optimizers operate on.
>   
>   Of course, a front end need only be converted to GENERIC if it
>   wants to use the tree optimizers, otherwise they don't need to
>   be modified at all.
> 
> 
> - Performance issues.  Right now the code generated by the tree
>   optimizers is worse than the RTL optimizers.  This is to be
>   expected at this stage and the whole tree optimization process
>   can be disabled.  So, in principle I don't see a real problem
>   with merging the infrastructure in.

It is understood what is needed in order to get this solved?
IE how to make RTL chain generated from GIMPLE comparable to one
generated directly from trees?

Honza


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