Re: An information about GIMPLE

[Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>]

Ugo Mezzogori <ugo.mezzogori@gmail.com> writes:

> I know that you rewrote the language Gimple in Tuples instead of trees.
> Why did you translare GIMPLE into tuple? which are benefits?

GIMPLE uses less memory in the compiler.

> Which is the mechanism?
> How do you pass from AST to GENERIC? and GENERIC to GIMPLE?
> and GIMPLE to RTL? ecc...
> Because, i understood what you did it, but i can not understand to
> pass into other language, for example from tree to tuple. Which is the
> mechanism?

I'm sorry I don't understand the question.  Converting from IR to
another is more or less straightforward.

The C frontend starts with a C frontend specific representation that
is really just GENERIC plus some language-specific tree codes.  The
C++ frontend is similar.  That representation is translated into
GENERIC, then into GIMPLE, then back into GENERIC (don't ask), then
into RTL, and finally the compiler generates assembler.

Ian