From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Doug Evans To: Greg McGary Cc: fche@redhat.com (Frank Ch. Eigler), cgen@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: Re: PATCH: string-expansion macros Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2001 13:18:00 -0000 Message-id: <15067.21393.766115.222329@casey.transmeta.com> References: <200103022358.QAA31874.cygnus.local.cgen@kayak.mcgary.org> X-SW-Source: 2001-q2/msg00014.html Greg McGary writes: > fche@redhat.com (Frank Ch. Eigler) writes: > > > : I'd like to know why the old code tried to match macros before hard > > : insns? The reason I need to try hard insns before macros is that for > > : my MIPS-like port, string macros catch cases that can't be handled by > > : one insn, and implement a "virtual insn" that do things in 2 or 3 hard > > : insns. [...] > > > > Yes, this makes sense in most cases, but methinks there are other > > opposite cases also. > > Can you think of an example? One way I think of macro insns is as being intercepts/wrappers for real insns. If you don't do the intercepts first, you ain't gonna get the effect you want. I think that's the way things should work, and I wonder if needing to reverse it reveals a problem that is best solved differently. Note that macros were originally intended to support emitting code rather than doing text transformation.