COND_EXPR lowering patch

[Diego Novillo]

On Tue, 2003-08-26 at 03:12, law@redhat.com wrote:

> Though given that I want to see us incrementally improve things, I do not
> want to see a mega patch which does both changes at once.
> 
> In fact, I'd really like to slow the patches down and get resolution
> on those which are already outstanding, starting with the LOOP_EXPR
> patch.  I believe there is a single outstanding issue with it that
> is preventing it from being installed (the gcov failures).  I'd really
> like to see that resolved before submission of COND_EXPR lowering.
> 
Agreed.  Let's get some closure on the outstanding patches.

One other (minor) thing about COND_EXPR lowering.  I would like us to
lower COND_EXPRs in a post-gimplification pass.  COND_EXPR may be a
useful construct for things like program understanding.  We have no use
for it in the optimizers, but maybe we find a use for it in other
analysis passes that may be developed in the future.

I don't feel too strongly about it, myself.  One could argue that those
analyses should work on GENERIC.  And right now I don't see any other
use for non-lowered COND_EXPRs, so if people think we should lower them
right away, I won't mind.


Diego.