This is the mail archive of the gcc-help@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: CDImode in reg

From: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>
To: Aurelien Buhrig <aurelien dot buhrig dot gcc at gmail dot com>
Cc: segher at kernel dot crashing dot org, gcc-help at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2011 11:22:22 -0700
Subject: Re: CDImode in reg
References: <CAJ-J9_VRBj7yY4j8-yWnzYjgoOYRLP-rxKLbDS7BwWVyyCvxoA@mail.gmail.com> <mcrobxwq28w.fsf@coign.corp.google.com> <CAJ-J9_WRCzXe7uTS13+FB=OOg7VCr_qA5CqPjYWqQkvpgT2JRg@mail.gmail.com> <mcr4nzopw5v.fsf@coign.corp.google.com> <CAJ-J9_XaB2wghrdhvr1nYZ7+bOvoggn1ZgEp_=7-zCMnsLWknQ@mail.gmail.com>

Aurelien Buhrig <aurelien.buhrig.gcc@gmail.com> writes:

>>> So it should be skipped and the ICE is the normal behavior for such
>>> irrelevant test cases ?
>>
>> Personally, I don't really think an ICE is ever an acceptable result
>> from the compiler. ÂHowever, there are practical considerations. ÂNobody
>> is ever going to write code like that for your processor. ÂIf gets an
>> ICE, no real programmer is ever going to notice. ÂAnd if it didn't get
>> an ICE it would get an error instead. ÂSo it's really up to you how much
>> effort you want to put in to generating a proper error message rather
>> than an ICE.
>
> I agree. BTW, I wonder how I could handle such an ICE from my backend
> if I wanted to.

I don't know--I don't know exactly what is causing the ICE.

Ian

Follow-Ups:
- Re: CDImode in reg
  - From: Aurelien Buhrig

References:
- CDImode in reg
  - From: Aurelien Buhrig
- Re: CDImode in reg
  - From: Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: CDImode in reg
  - From: Aurelien Buhrig
- Re: CDImode in reg
  - From: Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: CDImode in reg
  - From: Aurelien Buhrig

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