Better handling for multi-word values?

[Jeffrey A Law]

  In message < Pine.GSO.4.02A.9809071544380.23612-100000@matlock.informatik.rwth-aachen.de >you write:
  > > This sounds very similar to the half-finished CONCAT stuff already
  > > in the compiler.....
  > 
  > Similar, but not identical.  For example, CONCATs go away during tree->rtl
  > conversion and never show up during later passes.  And CONCATs only work with
  > exactly two separate objects, which I feel is an unnecessary restriction.
So if concats where extended to handle multiple objects would we be
able to use them to do the same thing efficiently?

Or should CONCAT go away after your MULTIWORD changes?

I'd really like to avoid having two RTXs that basically do the same
thing.

jeff