From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 43008 invoked by alias); 8 Jul 2016 13:16:11 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 42998 invoked by uid 89); 8 Jul 2016 13:16:10 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=Hx-languages-length:1351, shorter, duty, opportunity X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 08 Jul 2016 13:16:08 +0000 Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5331015561; Fri, 8 Jul 2016 13:16:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vpn-224-234.phx2.redhat.com (vpn-224-234.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.224.234]) by int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u68DG4sJ009425; Fri, 8 Jul 2016 09:16:05 -0400 Message-ID: <1467983763.18068.101.camel@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] separate shrink-wrapping From: David Malcolm To: Segher Boessenkool , Bernd Schmidt Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, dje.gcc@gmail.com Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2016 13:16:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20160708121102.GC12770@gate.crashing.org> References: <20160608151645.GA13163@gate.crashing.org> <20160614212411.GB13674@gate.crashing.org> <20160708121102.GC12770@gate.crashing.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-07/txt/msg00404.txt.bz2 On Fri, 2016-07-08 at 07:11 -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 12:42:34PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > > On 06/14/2016 11:24 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 06:43:23PM +0200, Bernd Schmidt wrote: > > > > On 06/08/2016 05:16 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > > > > There is no standard naming for this as far as I know. I'll > > > > > gladly > > > > > use a better name anyone comes up with. > > > > > > > > Maybe just subpart? > > > > > > How about "factor"? > > > > Still sounds odd to me. "Component" maybe? Ideally a native speaker > > would help decide what sounds natural to them. > > That does sound nice... OTOH, > > $ grep -i component *.c|wc -l > 1081 > > but the opportunity for confusion is limited I think (and calling it > "shrink-wrapping component" where needed sounds natural too!) As far as I understand the idea, there are a number of target-specific things that are to be done during a function call, and the optimization tries to detect which of optimize each of these separately. Some synonyms and near-synonyms for these "things": aspect component concern duty element facet factor item part piece portion responsibility and I suppose "shrink_wrap_part" is shorter than "shrink_wrap_component". (Yeah, I'm bike-shedding; sorry)