This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Combine four insns
- From: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at adacore dot com>
- To: Bernd Schmidt <bernds at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>, Richard Guenther <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>, David Daney <ddaney at caviumnetworks dot com>, Andi Kleen <andi at firstfloor dot org>, Steven Bosscher <stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 23:59:34 +0200
- Subject: Re: Combine four insns
- References: <4C5C20D0.firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <4C6D6BEC.firstname.lastname@example.org>
> As for the patch itself, Michael Matz provided constructive feedback
> which led to a heuristic that eliminated a large number of combine-4
> attempts. I conclude that either you didn't read the thread before
> attempting once again to block one of my patches, or the above is more
> than a little disingenuous.
It isn't, I replied to your message saying "I experimented with Michael's
heuristic last week, without getting useful results, so I'll use the one I
previously posted" so I genuinely thought you were discarding the heuristic
altogether. Glad to hear this isn't the case in the end.
As to again blocking one of your patches, there is nothing personal, you
happened to post 3 patches in a row that I think aren't the right approach
to solving problems in the part of the compiler I'm responsible for. For the
first one, I agreed to step down, for the second one you checked in something
without approval but the end result was sensible, but for the third one you
were about to set a precedent that wasn't acceptable to me.