This is the mail archive of the
java@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: Tree based inlining
- To: Bryce McKinlay <bryce at waitaki dot otago dot ac dot nz>
- Subject: Re: Tree based inlining
- From: Per Bothner <per at bothner dot com>
- Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2001 14:54:53 -0800
- CC: java at gcc dot gnu dot org
- References: <3BE0BBC1.7040908@waitaki.otago.ac.nz>
Bryce McKinlay wrote:
> But GCJ does use functions as trees and its representation is
> more-or-less the same as C and C++, right? Does anyone know of a
> reason why it wouldn't work?
Two problems to be aware of:
(1) GCJ uses functions as trees only when compiling from Java source.
When compiling from bytecode it it acts statement-at-atime, like the
traditional C/C++ mechanism.
(2) GCJ uses different tree nodes than G++ does for statements.
G++ has separate "statement" nodes - i.e. a conditional statement
is represented differently from a conditional expressions.
GCJ tries to be more "expression-oriented", using expression
nodes universally. There is no inhernet reason GCC cannot support
both styles, except that is seems a bit wasteful to me.
--Per