This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [tree-ssa] Insert on edge fix
- From: law at redhat dot com
- To: Andrew MacLeod <amacleod at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Jeff Sturm <jsturm at one-point dot com>, Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>, gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 13:53:18 -0600
- Subject: Re: [tree-ssa] Insert on edge fix
- Reply-to: law at redhat dot com
In message <1056137288.25116.5.camel@p4>, Andrew MacLeod writes:
>> >It's up to you guys, but I'd really, really like to get the gcj stuff in
>> >soon so I can stop playing catchup. As the tree stands today (i.e.
>> >without Andrew's reverted patch) it won't build.
>> I strongly recommend not reverting Andrew's patch. Andrew will be back
>> online Monday working regularly and I'm sure he'll give the problem
>> prompt attention.
>The reverted patch outghn't have any effect on anything else.. This
>*part* of the patch I offered to revert is purely a structural thing. We
>do slightly better code on the switch split.. doesn't affect the sweitch
>fallthru code, and doesnt affect the "correctness" of the previous
>patch..other than make libjava work :-)
>But anyway, If'n you want to wait until monday, thats cool too.
I'd prefer to wait until Monday. If it turns out to be rather nasty
and it's going to take a week to solve, then I'd suggest reverting so
that we can unblock Jeff.