This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [tree-ssa] RFC: Making control flow more explicit
- From: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>
- To: Nathanael Nerode <neroden at twcny dot rr dot com>
- Cc: "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2003 15:47:14 -0400
- Subject: Re: [tree-ssa] RFC: Making control flow more explicit
- Organization: Red Hat Canada
- References: <20030807191334.GA785@twcny.rr.com>
On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 15:13, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> Accordingly, if you're going to do this (which may be a good idea), may
> I suggest not doing it to GENERIC trees immediately, but rather
> implementing it as a specific pass on the tree structure?
That's how it is implemented. It's not a transformation on GENERIC
trees. It's done on GIMPLE, just prior to applying the SSA
> It is
> possible (likely?) that one would want to place this pass after the
> inliner, for instance. (The comments someone else made about WHIRL are
> relevant background here.)
Yes. The SSA optimizations are already done after the inliner.