This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: gcc.c-torture/compile/990801-2.c
- To: law at cygnus dot com, rth at cygnus dot com
- Subject: Re: gcc.c-torture/compile/990801-2.c
- From: Andrew Macleod <amacleod at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1999 05:48:48 -0700
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, oliva at dcc dot unicamp dot br, schwab at suse dot de
>> In message <19990923174410.A2379@cygnus.com>you write:
>> > On Thu, Sep 23, 1999 at 03:04:25PM -0600, Jeffrey A Law wrote:
>> > > It may be OK to just let cse_insn finish in the normal fashion given that
>> > > there's really nothing left for it to do with (set (pc) (label). Or mayb
>> > e
>> > > the thing to do is return and not take any chances with cse_insn doing
>> > > anything weird when presented with a deleted insn.
>> >
>> > How about leaving the deletion of unreachable blocks
>> > to delete_unreachable_blocks?
>> That's what we do in the global cprop code. For different reasons, but it is
>> certainly an option.
>>
I'm a big fan of letting optimizations take care of their own job, and
not trying to do someone elses as well. It makes things smaller, cleaner
and more maintainable. (Slower might also be an unfortunate side effect
on the compiler as a whole :-| ).
Richards suggestion gets my vote.
Andrew