Re: [RFC] Contributing tree-ssa to mainline

[Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>]

Tom Tromey writes:
 > >>>>> "Richard" == Richard Kenner <kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> writes:
 > 
 > >     Even if tree-SSA didn't made important speedups for common C programs I
 > >     think this is not problem as long as it is not making C worse and do
 > >     make C++ and Java better.
 > 
 > Richard> Can similar cases as those shown for C++ be constructed and
 > Richard> measured for Java?
 > 
 > I wouldn't expect to find Java equivalents of the C++ abstraction
 > penalty tests, since Java doesn't have stack-allocated objects.  (My
 > understanding is that we improve on these tests due to being able to
 > split up and register-ize stack-allocated objects...)
 > 
 > Right now I think the tree-ssa benefits to Java are more potential
 > than actual.  In the future we hope to get array bounds check
 > elimination, elimination of redundant type checks, and perhaps
 > elimination of redundant class initialization.

And stack-allocated objects; therefore...

Andrew.