This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
RE: What to do with new-ra for GCC 4.0
- From: "ctmb1mf" <ctmb1mf at aviation dot mor dot test-labs dot net>
- To: "Toon Moene" <toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl>,"Bernd Schmidt" <bernds_cb1 at t-online dot de>
- Cc: <law at redhat dot com>,"Steven Bosscher" <stevenb at suse dot de>,"Jan Vroonhof" <jvlists at ntlworld dot com>,"Daniel Berlin" <dberlin at dberlin dot org>,<gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>,BjÃrn Haase <Bjoern dot M dot Haase at web dot de>
- Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 15:28:04 -0500
- Subject: RE: What to do with new-ra for GCC 4.0
It seems like this controversy will never go away.
From: Toon Moene [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Fri 01/14/2005 03:26 PM
To: Bernd Schmidt
Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org; Steven Bosscher; Jan Vroonhof; Daniel Berlin; email@example.com; BjÃrn Haase
Subject: Re: What to do with new-ra for GCC 4.0
Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> Jeffrey A Law wrote:
>> If reload is going to hang around (and I suspect it will), I'd love to
>> see those two areas improved. I can't express how difficult I find
>> it to analyze the reload inheritance code. Reload ordering is only
>> mildly easier to understand.
> I'm attaching a proof-of-concept patch, against a checkout from
> 20050106. The main things this patch does
I meant to reply to Bernd earlier that I would really, really like his
patch, if for nothing else than that it would simplify reload.c so as
to make it more easily replaceable. Bernd has shown in the past that he
knows his way around reload, so I would appreciate if this patch could
be hammered into something that might be useful (if only in 4.1).
Toon Moene - e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org - phone: +31 346 214290
Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG Maartensdijk, The Netherlands
Maintainer, GNU Fortran 77: http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/g77_news.html
A maintainer of GNU Fortran 95: http://gcc.gnu.org/fortran/