This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: ifcvt/crossjump patch: Fix PR 42496, 21803
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 00:18, Eric Botcazou <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> That's a non-argument, and false IMO. ?Not every optimization can be
>> represented cleanly as a set of CFG manipulations, and this one can't.
> I wrote "this kind of transformations", not "all transformations".
> What about the algorithm sketched by Paolo?
That's what Bernd referred to when he said, "I think we can also
discard the suggestion of simulating the effect of a single
reorder_insns call with a series of complex CFG transformations, as
that seems entirely pointless."
I actually agree with him. I don't think it is _that_ complex
(particularly because my sketch did more than a single reorder_insns),
but I agree it is pointless. It is faking that head merging is a pure
CFG transformation when in fact it isn't.