This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] More places in fold-const.c which can be converted tofold_buildN
- From: Jeffrey A Law <law at redhat dot com>
- To: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>
- Cc: gcc-patches Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Kazu Hirata <kazu at cs dot umass dot edu>
- Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 16:34:04 -0700
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] More places in fold-const.c which can be converted tofold_buildN
- Organization: Red Hat, Inc
- References: <df6e1fffe4476d2160d995ba8cc33b7c@physics.uc.edu>
- Reply-to: law at redhat dot com
On Sat, 2005-03-26 at 20:00 -0500, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> I was doing a profile of gcc just for fun and I noticed that there was
> a place still
> left in fold-const.c to be converted over to fold_buildN. The reason
> why it was
> not converted before because a simple search for "fold (build[1-3] ("
> did not
> pick these places out because either they were spread out into two
> different
> lines or the expressions were complex.
>
> This patch converts 6 places which I found by searching for "fold ("
> and looking
> at the flow of the program.
>
> OK? Bootstrapped and tested on powerpc-darwin with no regressions.
>
> Thanks,
> Andrew Pinski
>
> * fold-const.c (fold_binary_op_with_conditional_arg): Convert "fold
> (buildN ("
> usage to "fold_buildN (".
> (fold_unary): Likewise.
> (fold_binary): Likewise.
This is fine. Though I would suggest trying to cleanup the ChangeLog
entry at bit.
jeff