This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Doxygen for tree-ssa
- From: Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>
- To: Bosscher Steven Civ USAFA/DFAN <Steven dot Bosscher at usafa dot af dot mil>
- Cc: "'Diego Novillo'" <dnovillo at redhat dot com>,"'gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org'" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 16:03:43 -0500
- Subject: Re: Doxygen for tree-ssa
On Monday, November 25, 2002, at 12:49 PM, Bosscher Steven Civ
USAFA/DFAN wrote:
Hmm, this is extremely frustrating...
Stuff like this:
Partial references
------------------
To deal with arrays and structures, we use the concept of
non-killing
definitions. When an array location or structure element is
defined,
the SSA builder will consider that a partial definition of the array
itself. Partial definitions are modeled by keeping an SSA link
(def-def link) between the current definition and the previous one.
This is used to chain definitions to arrays and structures, so that
all
possible reaching defs can be found later by compute_tree_rdefs.
For
instance,
1 A[i] = 5;
2 A[j] = 10;
3 y = A[k] + 10;
looks *very* ugly in HTML. The "---" line is put right after "Partial
references", the example gets collapsed into a single line, etc... Not
very
pretty. (I really miss an @example or @verbatim tag in Doxygen...)
The solution apparently is to
get rid of partial references, which we are doing.
:)