This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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: [patch] tree-ssa-dom.c: Fix memory leak.


On Mon, 2004-12-13 at 13:07 -0500, Kazu Hirata wrote:
> Hi Jeff,
> 
> > > With this patch, we no longer record expressions like LE_EXPR or
> > > GE_EXPR for boolean equality, but that should be OK as I don't think
> > > we use LE_EXPR or GE_EXPR on booleans.
> > I don't really follow what you're trying to say here.  Can you elaborate
> > more?  I don't think it matters, but I would like to understand what
> > you're trying to say.
> 
> Without this patch, if we enter the first "if", we would necessarily
> enter the third "if".  Note that the third "if" contains calls to
> record_conditions, which records expressions like LE_EXPR and GE_EXPR
> if the original expression is EQ_EXPR.
Ahh.  Yes.  I see what you're getting at now.  And yes, your change 
avoids recording those equivalences, which IMHO is the right thing to do

[ I vaguely remember pondering this a long time ago and came to the
  same overall conclusions you did. ]


>   Here I am assuming that these
> canonicalization of these boolean expressions happen somewhere.
As am I.

jeff



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