This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: "Documentation by paper"
law@redhat.com wrote:
> In message <20040209175301.GB3455@mail.shareable.org>, Jamie Lokier writes:
> >Granted, but papers do refer to them as "minimal SSA" et al., and the
> >properties are relevant to algorithms. Without being 100% certain
> >from memory, I recall some algorithms require some of the "useless"
> >PHI nodes to be present.
> The claims were that some algorithms may be able to do a better job at
> optimizing when those useless PHIs were present. I believe Daniel showed
> some evidence that refuted those claims.
Now I'm really confused. I don't recall which paper I read that an
algorithm (described in the paper) required certain extra PHI nodes,
i.e. a certain non-minimal requirement, but how can you assume it had
anything at all to do with performance claims in a different paper
that you read?
As I recall the extra PHI nodes were for correctness of a particular
algorithm, not performance. In other words, additional structure
beyond SSA. I could be 100% mistaken, because it was many years ago,
but your bizarre leap of logic here is still bizarre :/
-- Jamie