[RFC] avoiding too narrow register classes in reload

[Richard Henderson]

On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 07:20:10PM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> I realize the patch introduces some possibly-significant semantic
> changes, in that NO_REGS is now regarded as a SMALL_REGISTER_CLASS_P

I think that is indeed a surprising result.

> Does it make sense to narrow the
> predicate to hold only for non-empty classes, and adjust the
> one-before-last hunk, that uses the negated predicate in a way that
> requires it to hold for empty classes?

Please.


r~