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: Question about simplify_rtx ()

From: Paolo Bonzini <paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch>
To: GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Leehod Baruch <LEEHOD at il dot ibm dot com>
Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2005 10:02:58 +0200
Subject: Re: Question about simplify_rtx ()
References: <OFF59ED60E.69A1B320-ONC2257074.00294FF4-C2257074.002A6F65@il.ibm.com>

You showed me that it might be dangerous to replace rtx on the LHS
of a SET using simplify_replace_rtx ().
simplify_rtx () seems safer, is there a good reason why it doesn't
work with INSNs and SETs?

Because it works with expressions. :-)

Will a generalized function called simplify_insn () that uses simplify_rtx () be accepted?

I am no authority, but I think so.

Paolo

References:
- Question about simplify_rtx ()
  - From: Leehod Baruch

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