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: LTO and Code Compaction \ Reverse Inlining \ Procedure Abstraction?

From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
To: Rafael EspÃndola <rafael dot espindola at gmail dot com>
Cc: Miguel Angel <miguel55angel at hotmail dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2006 08:32:19 -0700
Subject: Re: LTO and Code Compaction \ Reverse Inlining \ Procedure Abstraction?
References: <BAY110-F24DFA15DA53FC64F50E729B16C0@phx.gbl> <44BAEECE.8080108@codesourcery.com> <564d96fb0607170422i2d623697paef598d812b2f7c4@mail.gmail.com>

Rafael EspÃndola wrote:
>> Some people call this "uninlining".  I've also heard the term
>> "procedural abstraction".  The generalization is to identify common code
>> fragments that can be turned into functions.  Then, replace the users of
>> the common code with function calls.
> 
> Is this the same as Code Factoring?
> http://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cfo.html

Yes, that's another name.

-- 
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
mark@codesourcery.com
(650) 331-3385 x713

Follow-Ups:
- Re: LTO and Code Compaction \ Reverse Inlining \ Procedure Abstraction?
  - From: Daniel Berlin

References:
- LTO and Code Compaction \ Reverse Inlining \ Procedure Abstraction?
  - From: Miguel Angel
- Re: LTO and Code Compaction \ Reverse Inlining \ Procedure Abstraction?
  - From: Mark Mitchell
- Re: LTO and Code Compaction \ Reverse Inlining \ Procedure Abstraction?
  - From: Rafael EspÃndola

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