Re: [tree-ssa] Fix gcc.dg/tree-ssa/20030530-2.c

[law at redhat dot com]

In message <wvladcofmyj.fsf@prospero.boston.redhat.com>, Jason Merrill writes:
 >On 11 Jun 2003 14:43:32 -0400, Diego Novillo <dnovillo@redhat.com> wrote:
 >
 >>> My gut is telling me that we should bite the bullet and sort the
 >>> vuses based on some stable criteria.
 >>>
 >> Agreed.  What I was proposing is to have them topologically sorted using
 >> the tree operands.  But that requires having separate sets for each
 >> operand.  The simplicity of the current scheme is that you have
 >> everything in a single set.  And that is giving us grief now.
 >>
 >>> Can you refresh my memory as to what objects can appear in the VUSE
 >>> array?  Just SSA_NAME, or do we potentially have things like
 >>> COMPONENT_REF, INDIRECT_REF, VAR_REF, etc?
 >>> 
 >> Just SSA_NAMEs.  VUSEs are typically emitted for aliases.  But we also
 >> use VUSE/VDEFs for aggregate types.
 >
 >Heck, if we only have to deal with SSA_NAMEs, which are unique (right?), we
 >can just sort by address.
Or their version #.    Either way it's a simple comparison routine.

jeff