This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [tree-ssa] Merging with bnw-simple
- From: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
- To: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche at redhat dot com>,Steven Bosscher <s dot bosscher at student dot tudelft dot nl>
- Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 16:11:05 +0100
- Subject: Re: [tree-ssa] Merging with bnw-simple
- References: <20020924140250.GA25658@tornado.toronto.redhat.com>
On Tue, 24 Sep 2002 10:02:50 -0400, Diego Novillo <dnovillo@redhat.com> wrote:
> Now that we have a working version of the re-designed tree IR, we
> have to think about merging it with tree-ssa. I'd like opinions
> on how we should proceed:
>
> 1- Merge the changes into tree-ssa-branch directly. This will
> likely break all the current tree optimizers and mudflap. I
> would commit the patch after fixing basic things like the
> flowgraph and DFA/SSA. Bootstraps on the branch would likely
> be broken for a while until we sort everything out.
>
> 2- Create a new temporary branch, fix everything there and merge
> the changes into tree-ssa.
>
> I am partially in favor of option #1. It would stop new development
> for a while, but it would avoid the potentially continuous pain
> of having to fix code that targets the old IR.
I'm definitely in favor of #1, but then the merge won't interfere with my
work at all. What do others think?
Jason