"Documentation by paper"

[Daniel Berlin]

On Feb 11, 2004, at 10:42 AM, Daniel Berlin wrote:

>
> On Feb 11, 2004, at 7:30 AM, Jamie Lokier wrote:
>
>> Daniel Berlin wrote:
>>> Someone mentioned something that wasn't related to the thread, which 
>>> is
>>> that they thought they read in a paper that a certain algorithm
>>> required useless phi nodes.
>>> I responded that I had provided evidence to contradict this.
>>
>> You have not provided such evidence.
>
> Pardon?
> Look through the archives.
>
>>
>> What makes you think we read the same paper or the same algorithm?
>
> I provided numbers for SSAPRE, SSA-CCP, and a few other algorithms 
> which claimed they needed extraneous phi nodes.

I didn't mean "needed" here, actually.
Needed implies they were a correctness issue.
Instead, they claimed it might help the algorithm perform better.