This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [tree-ssa] tree-ssa vs. fold
- From: Jeff Sturm <jsturm at one-point dot com>
- To: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>
- Cc: "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 12:14:29 -0400 (EDT)
- Subject: Re: [tree-ssa] tree-ssa vs. fold
On 7 Jun 2003, Diego Novillo wrote:
> > d) Fix fold() not to save_expr.
> >
> > Is d) the only real choice? Am I missing something easy?
> >
> IMO d) is the solution. fold() should be rewritten to generate GIMPLE
> code. In particular, why does it need those SAVE_EXPRs in this case?
> We know that these nodes have no side-effects in GIMPLE. Maybe it
> wouldn't be too hard to avoid emitting SAVE_EXPRs when we know we're
> folding GIMPLE code.
OK, I'll take a closer look at fold() and see what can be done.
Thanks,
Jeff