This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: What to do with new-ra for GCC 4.0
- From: Steven Bosscher <stevenb at suse dot de>
- To: Toon Moene <toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl>
- Cc: Bernd Schmidt <bernds_cb1 at t-online dot de>, law at redhat dot com, Jan Vroonhof <jvlists at ntlworld dot com>, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, Björn Haase <Bjoern dot M dot Haase at web dot de>
- Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 21:33:08 +0100
- Subject: Re: What to do with new-ra for GCC 4.0
- Organization: SUSE Labs
- References: <1238991885@web.de> <18048193.1105728481001.JavaMail.root@dtm1eusosrv72.dtm.ops.eu.uu.net> <41E82AE6.2080104@moene.indiv.nluug.nl>
On Friday 14 January 2005 21:26, Toon Moene wrote:
> 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[1].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).
Second that!
Gr.
Steven