This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [tree-ssa] Gimplifying Java
- From: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
- To: Jeff Sturm <jsturm at one-point dot com>
- Cc: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>, Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>, <java-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2003 08:46:31 -0400
- Subject: Re: [tree-ssa] Gimplifying Java
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0306302349100.24149-100000@ops2.one-point.com>
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 00:00:00 -0400 (EDT), Jeff Sturm <jsturm@one-point.com> wrote:
> Some old mail...
>
> On 13 Jun 2003, Diego Novillo wrote:
>> Does the java gimplifier generate a GIMPLE statement that is nothing but
>> a VAR_DECL? That is not good (and we should probably have a check to
>> ICE early)
>
> Not quite... but gcj did build GENERIC statments with nothing but a
> VAR_DECL. Such statements were stripped by the gimplifier, having no side
> effects. So the outcome was legal GIMPLE, but not what was intended.
What was intended?
> Perhaps the gimplifier could do better when dealing with VAR_DECL
> statements that are really expressions (i.e. nested in a non-void
> BIND_EXPR that is also used as the RHS of an assignment).
The gimplifier should handle that by wrapping it in a MODIFY_EXPR via
voidify_wrapper_expr.
Jason