Re: [tree-ssa] RFC: Making control flow more explicit

[Andrew MacLeod <amacleod at redhat dot com>]

On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 19:39, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 17:27, Zdenek Dvorak wrote:

> > The patch so far would have somewhat drastic consequences:
> > 1) I had to remove most of the cleanups in tree-cfg.c
> >
> This is precisely why we are doing evolutionary changes.  This, for
> instance, is unacceptable.  The goal in these three months is to beat
> mainline.  We cannot accept regressions of this nature.  Particulary if
> these are changes that have been sitting in your local tree with almost
> no exposure.
> 
> We could, however, move this to a sub-branch of tree-ssa to serve as a
> staging branch for doing some of the more radical stuff you have in
> mind.  We could move from that branch into tree-ssa, as they become more
> stable.

I dont see a branch as necessary either. Nothing proposed here is so
radical that it can't be done a step at a time.  It does, however, have
to be done a step at a time. And we ought to be able to do those steps
one at a time in a non-intrusive way. Most of this has been on the list
to do for some time, and they have all been broken out into single
steps.

Andrew