This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: RFC: allowing fold to change location of args (PR/41451)

From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
To: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gmail dot com>
Cc: Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at redhat dot com>, Richard Guenther <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:58:02 +0100
Subject: Re: RFC: allowing fold to change location of args (PR/41451)
References: <20091026153944.GA24939@redhat.com> <84fc9c000910260913p6457de93o6e232856677b7368@mail.gmail.com> <20091026163733.GA26251@redhat.com> <de8d50360910260940n5199421dr28db9518c32c5563@mail.gmail.com>
Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>

On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 09:40:06AM -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> Except (b) is correct as fold should not be modifiying the tree at
> all.  That is the whole point of fold_checksum_tree.  We allow some
> things to change like TYPE_VARIANTs and such but we should not allow a

The TYPE_VARIANTs case is just that a new variant can be added to a type,
but that's not a change of the type.  Similarly with other chains.
The only actual change we allow is that a decl might have
DECL_ASSEMBLER_NAME set during fold.

	Jakub

References:
- RFC: allowing fold to change location of args (PR/41451)
  - From: Aldy Hernandez
- Re: RFC: allowing fold to change location of args (PR/41451)
  - From: Richard Guenther
- Re: RFC: allowing fold to change location of args (PR/41451)
  - From: Aldy Hernandez
- Re: RFC: allowing fold to change location of args (PR/41451)
  - From: Andrew Pinski

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]