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: RFC: split_complex_args enhancement

From: Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at redhat dot com>
To: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>, amodra at bigpond dot net dot au, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 14:33:06 -0400
Subject: Re: RFC: split_complex_args enhancement
References: <20041117181657.GA15977@redhat.com> <20041117182906.GA12180@redhat.com>

On Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 10:29:06AM -0800, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 02:16:57PM -0400, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> > ... but I'm hoping the SPLIT_COMPLEX_ARG can be taught new tricks.
> 
> I don't think this is a good idea.  S_C_A means *explicitly* that
> the two elements should be treated as separate arguments.  Adding
> some back door so that you *don't* treat them as separate arguments
> defeats the point.

Arghhh...that's what I thought.  Oh well, and here I thought I was done.

Really...who cares about __complex__ ABI compatability?

Aldy

Follow-Ups:
- Re: RFC: split_complex_args enhancement
  - From: Alan Modra

References:
- RFC: split_complex_args enhancement
  - From: Aldy Hernandez
- Re: RFC: split_complex_args enhancement
  - From: Richard Henderson

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