This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
RE: What to remove after tree-ssa is merged?
- From: "S. Bosscher" <S dot Bosscher at student dot tudelft dot nl>
- To: "'kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu '" <kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu>,"'pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu '" <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>
- Cc: "'gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org '" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 16:12:57 +0100
- Subject: RE: What to remove after tree-ssa is merged?
The reasoning so far has been: If it can be expressed in RTL,
then there has to be an equivalent representation in trees.
So basically we hope that PLACEHOLDER_EXPRs can be expanded
to an equivalent tree without PLACEHOLDER_EXPPs, i.e. making
this node an Ada language-specific tree node. If it is
impossble to represent the semantics of a PLACEHOLDER_EXPR
in a lowered tree, then we'll have to revisit this issue.
Gr.
Steven
-----Original Message-----
From: kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu
To: pinskia@physics.uc.edu
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Sent: 2/4/04 3:39 PM
Subject: Re: What to remove after tree-ssa is merged?
Should really PLACEHOLDER_EXPR be done in the front-end
and be expanded to what it really does in gimplify stage
which every other language needs to do with its language
specific trees.
Read the documentation and explain what you propose expanding it *to*.
There's no way to express the needed semantics without this or something
very similar.