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: [tuples] gimple-tuples-branch created


On 9/18/06, Aldy Hernandez <aldyh@redhat.com> wrote:
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 04:25:39PM -0400, Diego Novillo wrote:
> Aldy Hernandez wrote on 09/18/06 15:55:
>
> > Agreed?
> >
> Couldn't you union fields gimple_stmt and stmt?  Though this is gross
> enough already.  But, sure, I don't really see any simpler way.

That's what I thought, but I don't know if this is going to cause GC
problems.  Danny?

Yes, that was the other option i presented. The problem with unioning them is that then you need a tag and *another* function to tell the GC which member of the union is live.

If this is a temporary hack, it's easier to just keep them both there.

Also, gsi_stmt_ptr should eventually return a non-tree (it should
return a struct gimple_stmt *)
Of course, you can't make it do that yet.



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