Re: [tree-ssa] gimple and fold_stmt

[Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>]

> On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 01:25:53AM +0100, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > Did we prepared some plan how to deal with issues like this?
> 
> No.  We really should have folded this before getting to gimple.

This does not happen as the original is  field_decl != const and the
particular simplifier I quoted works only for var_decl != const.
The field_decl gets replaced by var_decl as result of gimplification but
gimplify does not re-optimize (that happens by my patch adding fold_stmt
into remove_useless* we discussed earlier).

Perhaps the folder should be relaxed to work for field_decls as well?
How generic shall it be?

Honza
> 
> And if we get it *in* gimple, due to front end bugs, well, we
> simply cannot allow the replacement.
> 
> 
> r~