This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
More questions related to gimplification
- From: neroden at fastmail dot fm (Nathanael Nerode)
- To: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 06:25:26 -0400
- Subject: More questions related to gimplification
Is it possible to have a MODIFY_EXPR going into gimplify_modify_expr,
such that
(1) The LHS is_gimple_reg_type (TREE_TYPE(lhs))
(2) The RHS, after gimplification, is *not*
or
(1) The RHS, after gimplification, is_gimple_reg_type (TREE_TYPE(lhs))
(2) The LHS is *not*
If this is indeed supposed to be impossible,
(a) could it be reasonable to add a sanity check for it into
gimplify_modify_expr?
(b) this would allow some logic simplification
If it is actually supposed to be possible, under what circumstances could it
happen?
(Note that is_gimple_reg_type means !AGGREGATE_TYPE_P && != COMPLEX_TYPE.)
--
This space intentionally left blank.