From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30060 invoked by alias); 4 May 2011 11:44:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 30047 invoked by uid 22791); 4 May 2011 11:44:56 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from vlsi1.gnat.com (HELO vlsi1.gnat.com) (205.232.38.7) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 04 May 2011 11:44:43 +0000 Received: by vlsi1.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 3004) id 1E15033C67; Wed, 4 May 2011 07:44:42 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 04 May 2011 11:50:00 -0000 To: joseph@codesourcery.com Subject: Re: [google]: initialize language field for clone function struct Cc: davidxl@google.com, ebotcazou@gnat.com, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, hubicka@ucw.cz, richard.guenther@gmail.com In-Reply-To: References: <201105041200.29307.ebotcazou@adacore.com> Message-Id: <20110504114442.1E15033C67@vlsi1.gnat.com> From: kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner) 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 X-SW-Source: 2011-05/txt/msg00280.txt.bz2 > That's what we should phase out. The eventual aim should be for (a) > folding on GIMPLE (gimple-fold etc. - working with SSA not combined trees) > as an optimization and (b) folding done by front ends only when required > for language semantics (e.g. constant expressions). Why? Isn't it always better to optimize as early as you can when it's easy? Why keep unfolded constants around at all?