bct_p *is* used in loop.c:strength_reduction

Kaveh R. Ghazi ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu
Thu Oct 15 16:45:00 GMT 1998

 > From: David Edelsohn <dje@watson.ibm.com>
 > 	I think that Kaveh is using *much* too limited a set of platforms
 > to test for no-return and unused parameters and does not appear to be
 > checking the results visually for correctness.  By inspection in both
 > loop.c:strength_reduction() and jump.c:sets_cc0_p(), one can see that
 > these parameters are used in certain cases.
 > 	These warning cleanups are happening much too automatically and
 > with far too little consideration.  Mark Mitchell and I should not need to
 > wade through massive patches to discover that these mistakes are being
 > introduced. 
 > 	This is starting to introduce bugs into the compiler due to
 > misapplied optimizations.  Previously it was removing labels which at
 > least would fail at compile time.
 > 	If the warnings output of a build on one or a few platforms are
 > going to be used as the basis for transforming the compiler sources in
 > this manner, this must stop.
 > 	I am extremely concerned about the entire set of Oct 14 cleanup
 > changes which make this type of assumption throughout.  Again, all
 > parameters used within HAVE_cc0 ifdefs have been marked with
 > ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED.  Either all of these changes need to be re-checked or
 > the patch should be reverted.  Please let me know which is going to
 > happen.
 > David


	Thanks for your critique of my work.  I do my best to respect
your wishes and work together with you and other egcs maintainers.
But your entire message is overwrought.  I don't think any of your
comments are fair.  I put considerable effort into my patches to make
sure they are correct and test them on five different platforms.

	My original patches included conditionalizations for these
attributes but Jeff suggested that they were making the code too
unreadable and asked that I just use ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED unconditionally.
(See the discussion starting with:
http://www.cygnus.com/ml/egcs-patches/1998-Oct/0481.html )

	I would appreciate it, if you would please undo your Oct 15th
reversion of my original patch.  There was no cause for you to have
done this.

Kaveh R. Ghazi			Engagement Manager / Project Services
ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu		Icon CMT Corp.

More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list