This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [RFC] Use accessor macros for the head and end of a basic block
- From: "Zack Weinberg" <zack at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Steven Bosscher <steven at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Cc: mark at codesourcery dot com, law at redhat dot com, Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, dnovillo at redhat dot com
- Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 14:16:14 -0800
- Subject: Re: [RFC] Use accessor macros for the head and end of a basic block
- References: <200312090652.hB96qQk6030230@speedy.slc.redhat.com><200312100857.49315.steven@gcc.gnu.org>
Steven Bosscher <steven@gcc.gnu.org> writes:
> On Tuesday 09 December 2003 07:52, law@redhat.com wrote:
>> In message <200312090749.12424.steven@gcc.gnu.org>, Steven Bosscher writes:
>> >On Tuesday 09 December 2003 05:05, law@redhat.com wrote:
>> >> I would _strongly_ recommend this go into the mainline first
>> >
>> >Of course. Where did I say [tree-ssa] in the subject line?
>> >
>> >I take it you do not dislike the idea of putting this kind of patch on
>> >mainline in this stage?
>>
>> For mainline, I'm more than happy to leave it up to Mark :-) I've got no
>> strong opinions there.
>
> Here is the full patch for mainline, bootstrapped (c,c++,objc,f77) and
> checked on i686-pc-linux-gnu. Very mechanical, in all. I renamed the
> head and end field to make sure no-one uses it again and gets away with
> it unpunished...
>
> OK for mainline? Once it's there I'll do the same for tree-ssa.
Since Mark is out of town, since this is extremely mechanical and low
risk, and since divergence between mainline and tree-ssa is
undesirable here, I am willing to approve this patch for mainline -
but it comes right back out again if it causes the slightest bit of
trouble, capische?
zw