This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [tree-ssa] POOMA compile time / memory requirement comparison

From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
To: Richard Guenther <rguenth at tat dot physik dot uni-tuebingen dot de>
Cc: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>, Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Wed, 5 May 2004 16:51:46 -0700
Subject: Re: [tree-ssa] POOMA compile time / memory requirement comparison
References: <Pine.LNX.4.53.0405041140270.15724@bellatrix.tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de> <1083683900.11095.190.camel@localhost.localdomain> <Pine.LNX.4.53.0405041719300.15724@bellatrix.tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de> <409931D3.9070401@codesourcery.com> <40993D6C.5030603@tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de>

On Wed, May 05, 2004 at 09:15:56PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
> Also, why do we gimplify and symout for -fsyntax-only?

Because the C front end finishes doing semantic analysis
during gimplification.


r~

References:
- [tree-ssa] POOMA compile time / memory requirement comparison
  - From: Richard Guenther
- Re: [tree-ssa] POOMA compile time / memory requirement comparison
  - From: Diego Novillo
- Re: [tree-ssa] POOMA compile time / memory requirement comparison
  - From: Richard Guenther
- Re: [tree-ssa] POOMA compile time / memory requirement comparison
  - From: Mark Mitchell
- Re: [tree-ssa] POOMA compile time / memory requirement comparison
  - From: Richard Guenther

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]