This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Assertify rs6000
On Fri, Apr 22, 2005 at 03:28:20PM +0100, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> David Edelsohn wrote:
> > This generally looks okay, but I found some changes that look like
> >typos.
> >
> > The free-standing block in num_insns_constant does not look correct.
> >
> >! case CONST_DOUBLE:
> >! if (mode == SFmode)
> >! {
> //first bit & return
> >! }
> >
> > {
> //second bit
>
> I know that bit's correct -- I checked it several times. The original
> code looked like,
> if (code == CONST_INT)
> something
> else if (code == CONST_DOUBLE && mode == SFmode)
> first bit & return
> else if (code == CONST_DOUBLE)
> second bit
> else
> abort
>
> Admittedly the freestanding block for 'second bit' _looks_ odd. To
> remove that I'd have to move the variables declared within it up to an
> outer scope. I can do that if you want.
I generally keep the else in this case. Yes, it doesn't really
add anything to the control flow, but it makes the brain hurt less.
r~