Re: GCC 3.1 Prerelease

[Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>]

On Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 05:24:15PM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> It sounds like maybe if the front end were to promise that there
> were no gotos in a particular function, this would improve things,
> but I'm not sure.

Less severe than that.  No gotos within a specific region.  Or
more to the point, binding cleanup code with exception regions
before generating rtl for them rather than after.

> Jason, Richard, what do you think about this?  The only practical
> option, beyond the speedups Richard already implemented, is to
> revert Jason's correctness patch at this point.

I really dislike the idea of reverting the correctness patch.

The most practical solution for people actually using these
sorts of template packages is to not nest the expressions
quite so deeply.  I.e. use

	c = a + b;
	e = c * d;
	g = e + f;

instead of

	g = (a + b) * d + f;

or whatever.


r~