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: (known?) Issue with bitmap iterators

From: Paolo Bonzini <bonzini at gnu dot org>
To: Dave Korn <dave dot korn dot cygwin at googlemail dot com>
Cc: Richard Guenther <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>, Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>, GCC <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 15:37:37 +0200
Subject: Re: (known?) Issue with bitmap iterators
References: <4A3CF81C.7050406@redhat.com> <4aca3dc20906211944hb27a3day21bc22c8a9f58aee@mail.gmail.com> <4A3F6ED1.6020106@gmail.com> <84fc9c000906220437t2d6fcb8fx6a59a45b7ed49abd@mail.gmail.com> <4A3F84C7.2000004@gmail.com>

  I took a look.  I don't think it would be hideously hacky to do something
like ...

#define EXECUTE_IF_SET_IN_BITMAP(BITMAP, MIN, BITNUM, ITER)		\
  for ((BITMAP)->ro_flag = true,					\
	bmp_iter_set_init (&(ITER), (BITMAP), (MIN), &(BITNUM));	\
       (BITMAP)->ro_flag = bmp_iter_set (&(ITER), &(BITNUM));		\
       bmp_iter_next (&(ITER), &(BITNUM)))

You should add a BREAK_FROM_EXECUTE_IF_SET(BITMAP) macro too, however.

Paolo

Follow-Ups:
- Re: (known?) Issue with bitmap iterators
  - From: Dave Korn

References:
- (known?) Issue with bitmap iterators
  - From: Jeff Law
- Re: (known?) Issue with bitmap iterators
  - From: Daniel Berlin
- Re: (known?) Issue with bitmap iterators
  - From: Dave Korn
- Re: (known?) Issue with bitmap iterators
  - From: Richard Guenther
- Re: (known?) Issue with bitmap iterators
  - From: Dave Korn

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