This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: TREE_CODE mania
- From: Devang Patel <dpatel at apple dot com>
- To: Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin dot org>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2002 19:51:45 -0700
- Subject: Re: TREE_CODE mania
On Wednesday, September 4, 2002, at 04:04 PM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
Sure, we can try using different allocation schemes to achieve better compile
time performance. But this approach is like -- earn more money and allocate
funds in better way to meet the budget. I am thinking in terms, can we reduce
expenditure ?
By the by, did you mark the TREE_CODE_read function as const/pure (i'm not sure tree_code's aren't modified in place, if they are, it's both, if they aren't, it's at least one of them), so that it accurately simulates the macro in terms of actual accesses?
Well, TREE_CODE_read() name is misleading. It is recording read as well as write accesses.
-Devang