LNO Branch merge proposal

[David Edelsohn]

>>>>> Richard Henderson writes:

Richard> I would suggest *not* merging the entire LNO branch en masse, but
Richard> rather extracting the various parts and having them reviewed as 
Richard> with any regular development.

Richard> As you yourself said, there's nothing revolutionary about LNO,
Richard> its merely a set of passes on top of tree-ssa.  As such, I see
Richard> no compelling reason for it to be merged as a whole.

Richard> I would suggest that the merge process begin with the new LNO
Richard> infrastructure bits (ivs, dependency analysis, etc), and then
Richard> proceed with the higher-level transforms.

	As long as we do not arbitrarily cut off patches for GCC 3.5
before all LNO work has been reviewed and merged, there probably is little
difference.  LNO presumably would be reviewed in pieces anyway.

	A purpose of proposing the LNO branch is to alert everyone to the
goal and to design a plan to successfully merge the functionality for GCC
3.5.

David