public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/17967] [4.0 Regression] Expand is considered slower? (remove_useless_stmts is considered part of expand)
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 14:07:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20041014140717.23057.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20041013035800.17967.pinskia@gcc.gnu.org>
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-14 14:07 -------
Unless someone can prove that eh part of remove_useless_stmt does not matter any more because of
the lowering of eh, I think the patch is wrong. Maybe we can move the eh part into the lowering of the
eh and then we don't have to worry about that if we don't do it alreay.
Doing CFG already does the some parts of remove_useless_stmt and cfg_remove_useless_stmt does the
conditional part already. I think eh lowering does the rest so maybe we can remove this compile time
problem.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed| |1
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2004-10-14 14:07:16
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17967
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-10-14 14:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-10-13 3:58 [Bug middle-end/17967] New: [4.0 Regression] Expand is considered slower? (or is it because gimplifier " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-10-13 3:58 ` [Bug middle-end/17967] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-10-13 4:03 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-10-13 12:34 ` [Bug middle-end/17967] [4.0 Regression] Expand is considered slower? (remove_useless_stmts is " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-10-13 20:26 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-10-13 20:33 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-10-14 14:07 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org [this message]
2004-10-14 14:56 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-10-14 18:38 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-10-14 21:59 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-10-14 22:00 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-10-15 4:17 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-10-15 4:18 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-10-17 22:55 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-10-18 18:31 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-10-23 19:16 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-10-23 19:17 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20041014140717.23057.qmail@sourceware.org \
--to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).