This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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]

Re: [C++ PATCH] Inline even functions containing static variables (take 4)

To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
Subject: Re: [C++ PATCH] Inline even functions containing static variables (take 4)
From: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
Date: 23 Mar 2001 03:54:06 +0000
Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
References: <20010320164828.C1635@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz><u94rwo5qy8.fsf@casey.cambridge.redhat.com><20010320124338.Z11594@devserv.devel.redhat.com><20010321114335.K11594@devserv.devel.redhat.com><u9bsqvaszp.fsf@casey.cambridge.redhat.com><20010322084723.H1169@devserv.devel.redhat.com>

>>>>> "Jakub" == Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> writes:

> +  init = tmp;
> +  tmp = save_expr (tmp);
> +  if (TREE_STATIC (decl) && !TREE_CONSTANT (tmp))
> +    return tmp;

Does anything break if we remove this save_expr?  It seems useless, as
does the assignment to init.

Other than that, OK for trunk and branch.  Thanks!

Jason

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [C++ PATCH] Inline even functions containing static variables (take 4)
  - From: Jakub Jelinek

References:
- [C++ PATCH] Inline even functions containing static variables (take 2)
  - From: Jakub Jelinek
- Re: [C++ PATCH] Inline even functions containing static variables (take 2)
  - From: Jason Merrill
- Re: [C++ PATCH] Inline even functions containing static variables (take 2)
  - From: Jakub Jelinek
- [C++ PATCH] Inline even functions containing static variables (take 3)
  - From: Jakub Jelinek
- Re: [C++ PATCH] Inline even functions containing static variables (take 3)
  - From: Jason Merrill
- [C++ PATCH] Inline even functions containing static variables (take 4)
  - From: Jakub Jelinek

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