Re: thanks for the memory work

[law at redhat dot com]

In message <1069871204.23429.3177.camel@p4>, Andrew MacLeod writes:
 >On Wed, 2003-11-26 at 12:58, law@redhat.com wrote:
 >> In message <1069853017.23429.2811.camel@p4>, Andrew MacLeod writes:
 >>  >Initial plan is to have 1 varray of tree * for real operands over all
 >>  >stmts. The annotation will then have an index into this array for defs
 >>  >and one for uses. So when you want the uses(s), you have direct access
 >>  >to them. Initially Id put the def/use count in the annotation as well
 >>  >simply for speed. It'll be dead easy to change whe Im done tho. 
 >>  >Initially Im trying to get rid of all those varrays.
 >> So you have indices in the annotation itself.  That's fine and good.  What
 >> about the case where we have more than the standard number of operands
 >> (say an ASM)?
 >There is no limit... its uses elements INDEX+0->INDEX+(N-1) in the
 >primary VARRAY. N can be whatever size the stmt wants/needs.
 >
 >Initially I think I'll have NUM and INDEX in the annotation for use and
 >def. We can muddy around with moving num into the VARRAY, or doing
 >something else, but for now I'll give this a try. Seems like a good
 >place to start. 
Ok.  Got it.  Seems reasonable.

Jeff