[G]CSE of extended asm statements
Wed Aug 30 00:28:00 GMT 2000
On Tue, 29 Aug 2000, Richard Henderson wrote:
> Actually, the best way to represent this is with
> (set (parallel [(out1) (out2) (out3)])
> (asm_operand ...))
I strongly dislike that. We have an existing way to describe
parallel sets, and I don't see a benefit in adding another one.
I have a feeling that allowing the above will create a whole new
set of bugs because most likely there are several dozen places
in the compiler that would not be able to handle this construct.
More information about the Gcc-patches