This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Tree sharing issues...
- From: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>
- To: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>, Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>, Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 19:46:26 -0500
- Subject: Re: Tree sharing issues...
- Organization: Red Hat Canada
- References: <200311200040.hAK0e5U5013862@speedy.slc.redhat.com>
On Wed, 2003-11-19 at 19:40, law@redhat.com wrote:
> In message <1069288378.22708.2.camel@frodo.toronto.redhat.com>, Diego Novillo w
> rites:
>
> >We always rewrite inside an ARRAY_REF. Consider A[i][j]. Both i and j
> >will be typically renamed.
> Err, what about when the index is a constant?
>
Yeah, I had missed that. In that case, sharing shouldn't be a problem
(like the example Jan posted earlier). It goes back to following what
get_expr_operands does. Any tree operand that may end up in def_ops or
use_ops must not be shared.
Diego.