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

[Michael Matz]

Hi,

On Mon, 11 Aug 2003, Diego Novillo wrote:

> However, if we are going to do this at the gimplifier then we need to
> consider whether we want GIMPLE itself be an IL with no control
> structures other than COND_EXPRs and GOTO_EXPRs.

FWIW I think GIMPLE should have no intrinsic control flow, except the
GOTO_EXPR (and maybe COND_EXPR).  Everything else introduces artifacts
when dealing with almost all control flow aware optimizations (like you
repeatedly saw in the past when making the different insert-on-edges stuff
work).  The control flow itself is better represented by explicit blocks
and edges, with edges coming out only at the end.


Ciao,
Michael.