Re: Proposal: changing representation of memory references

["Andrew Pinski" <pinskia at gmail dot com>]

On 4/4/07, Zdenek Dvorak <rakdver@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> at the moment, any pass that needs to process memory references are
> complicated (or restricted to handling just a limited set of cases) by
> the need to interpret the quite complex representation of memory
> references that we have in gimple.  For example, there are about 1000 of
> lines of quite convoluted code in tree-data-ref.c and about 500 lines in
> tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c dealing with parsing and analysing memory
> references.

I have my doubts changing this is the correct step forward.  Having a
high level representation is a good thing and having it represented as
*(base+offset) (plus other info) might just make the other passes that
like the high level representation get worse.  I also don't see why
tree-data-ref.c and tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c could not use
get_inner_reference which parses the memory references for you.  Maybe
I don't see the benifit in always changing our IR without really
thinking about the problem and seeing if there are already tools
(functions) which do the same thing in a common place.

Thanks,
Andrew Pinski