This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [tree-ssa] COND_EXPR lowering.
Hello,
> >> The only other thing that I think Diego agreed with (yes? no?) is that
> >> we probably ought to set the BB for the 2 goto's on the arms of the
> >> COND_EXPR. Yeah, they aren't real stmt's, but there is no reason someone
> >> couldn't look at them as real stmts.. ie, someone doing path following
> >> may want to process the 2 arms exactly like they process a GOTO, so we
> >> ought to make them behave like a GOTO stmt for consistancy, so we ought
> >> to set their BB.
> >
> >I don't want to do it. Every change of the statement would than have to
> >take care of setting it, which would be a source of unnecessary errors.
> Err, why again aren't the arms real statements? I thought we had decided
> to go ahead and leave them as real statements with their associated basic
> blocks.
no, they are not separate statements. And unless someone gives me some
convincing arguments why they should be, I am not going to change it.
Period. You had two months to discuss these things, and you could
easily check on tree-ssa-cfg-branch what I have in mind, so don't come with
changes that would require reworking all I had done to me now.
Zdenek