[tree-ssa] reaching def. question

[law@redhat.com]

In message <Pine.LNX.4.56.0403171348290.3322@dberlin.org>, Daniel Berlin writes
:
 >
 >
 >On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 law@redhat.com wrote:
 >
 >> In message <1079536309.32455.62.camel@localhost.localdomain>, Diego Novillo
 > wri
 >> tes:
 >>  >On Wed, 2004-03-17 at 02:21, Zdenek Dvorak wrote:
 >>  >
 >>  >> I have thought about this issue for some time -- would not it be better
 >>  >> to do ssa rewriting over ssa names, thus not requiring the rewrite out
 >>  >> of ssa?
 >>  >>
 >>  >That was the original design, yes.  See my other reply to this thread
 >>  >earlier today.
 >> Can one of y'all walk me through this and how it would work when the domina
 >tor
 >> tree changes?
 >>
 >> If you can make it work in that situation, then we'd be able to simplify
 >> a goodly amount of code in the dominator optimizer.
 >There's a paper on exactly this type of incremental update to SSA
 >somewhere.  I'll try to find it if someone doesn't explain it satisfactorily
 >beforehand.
I've seen stuff for incremental updates when adding new assginments.  I have
not seen stuff for incremental updates when changing the dominator tree.  If
you've got the latter, I'd love to get a copy.

jeff