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: RFC: cgraph/lowering vs. finish_file for GCC/UPC rewrites?

From: Gary Funck <gary at intrepid dot com>
To: Richard Guenther <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
Cc: GCC List <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 11:51:55 -0700
Subject: Re: RFC: cgraph/lowering vs. finish_file for GCC/UPC rewrites?
References: <20090914011819.GF7654@intrepid.com> <84fc9c000909140252p3c9ad031wa3279dfd82541b2c@mail.gmail.com>

On 09/14/09 11:52:11, Richard Guenther wrote:
> Without reading all the details of your mail I suggest that you
> perform a custom walk over the function bodies right before
> the frontend calls cgraph_finalize_compilation_unit () that
> performs the necessary lowering (and function creation) to
> GENERIC.  The C++ frontend already does this during its
> genericize phase to transform frontend specific trees to
> middle-end GENERIC trees.

Richard, thanks.  Will take a look at how C++ handles things.

- Gary

References:
- RFC: cgraph/lowering vs. finish_file for GCC/UPC rewrites?
  - From: Gary Funck
- Re: RFC: cgraph/lowering vs. finish_file for GCC/UPC rewrites?
  - From: Richard Guenther

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