This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [RFA] Which is better? More and simplier patterns? Fewerpatterns with more embedded code?
- From: Eric Christopher <echristo at redhat dot com>
- To: Matt Thomas <matt at 3am-software dot com>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 23:55:48 -0700
- Subject: Re: [RFA] Which is better? More and simplier patterns? Fewerpatterns with more embedded code?
- References: <426F270A.firstname.lastname@example.org>
> I like the more and simplier patterns approach but I'm wondering what
> the general recommendation is?
Mostly what I go for in individual insns,though I try to make sure that
the lengths are equal and it's something generated by the named
patterns. I.e. make sure that the patterns you do have don't have a lot
of multiple insns to accomplish a single task, but also make sure that
you're generating the insns in the first place :)