This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: ssa-ccp: Remove unused macro.
- From: Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>
- To: Geoff Keating <geoffk at redhat dot com>
- Cc: neil at daikokuya dot co dot uk, <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 10:35:48 -0400 (EDT)
- Subject: Re: ssa-ccp: Remove unused macro.
On Mon, 22 Jul 2002, Geoff Keating wrote:
> > Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 10:07:28 -0400
> > Cc: Neil Booth <neil@daikokuya.co.uk>, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> > From: Daniel Berlin <dberlin@dberlin.org>
> > X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.2 required=5.0
> > tests=IN_REP_TO,SUBJ_REMOVE,AWL
> > version=2.40
> > X-Spam-Level:
> > X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Jul 2002 14:09:08.0453 (UTC) FILETIME=[587AF950:01C23189]
> >
> >
> > On Monday, July 22, 2002, at 08:21 AM, Geoff Keating wrote:
> >
> > > Neil Booth <neil@daikokuya.co.uk> writes:
> > >
> > >> OK?
> > >
> > > OK. (The macro is probably wrong, anyway.)
> > >
> > Actually, it's not wrong.
> > Why would you say so?
> > It was only used in one place (do a search for XVEC (SET_SRC (x), 0)),
> > and I had written is as a macro so that it was easy to tell what the
> > heck we were trying to do.
>
> I thought it was wrong because of the use of SET_SRC, but I see that
> phi nodes are always of the right form.
Correct, they have to be. We also PHi_NODE_P them before using them.
>
> If you like, feel free to put the macro back and change the place
> where it would be used to actually use it...
No, i have no love of it.
Jeff probably was the one who removed it when he revamped SSA-CCP from the
original I had sent.
If he's fine with not using it, i don't care.
>
>