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: BIT_FIELD_REF on the LHS

From: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gmail dot com>
To: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 22:08:51 +0900
Subject: Re: BIT_FIELD_REF on the LHS
References: <de8d50360607130027v3a4bd2efu8c7c5e6f0ff60f5e@mail.gmail.com> <44B63D61.8060003@redhat.com> <1E8E62DE-3296-4C78-AC79-016B524C7FFA@gmail.com> <44B64539.5070901@redhat.com>

On Jul 13, 2006, at 10:06 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:

That definitely seems wrong. We shouldn't be considering vector types to be GIMPLE register types if we are going to be chunking them out with BIT_FIELD_REF. The verifier ought to check that.

I am thinking about cleaning this up by using DECL_COMPLEX_GIMPLE_REG_P for vectors also (maybe renaming it), do you think that is a good idea?

Thanks,
Andrew Pinski

References:
- BIT_FIELD_REF on the LHS
  - From: Andrew Pinski
- Re: BIT_FIELD_REF on the LHS
  - From: Diego Novillo
- Re: BIT_FIELD_REF on the LHS
  - From: Andrew Pinski
- Re: BIT_FIELD_REF on the LHS
  - From: Diego Novillo

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