[tree-ssa] RFC: Making control flow more explicit

[Zdenek Dvorak]

Hello,

> >>>>And what happened to tree/block statement iterators?  You said you
> >>>>don't
> >>>>like them,
> >>>
> >>>I don't like the purpose for that block statement iterators were
> >>>created
> >>>and their internals; otherwise I like the idea.
> >>>
> >>Have you actually tested the insert (both edge and non) iterators, for
> >>instance?
> >
> >yes, to some amount (they are also used in ordinary un-ssa).
> 
> But un-ssa has actually not, to my knowledge, every exposed a bug in 
> the iterators, while PRE has done it frequently.
> 
> >Given that
> >now they are trivial, I don't fear there would be any major problems
> >with them.
> >
> I'd be happy to test them if you sent me the huge patch.

here is the patch; it should bootstrap at least c and c++.

Zdenek
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: diff_xxx.diff.bz2
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 44060 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/attachments/20030809/8e9918b4/attachment.obj>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: tree-flatten.c.bz2
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 4608 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/attachments/20030809/8e9918b4/attachment-0001.obj>