Re: avoid useless if-before-free tests

[Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 5:34 PM, Jeff Law <law@redhat.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 03/05/11 07:05, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Someone asked me about this yesterday, and since I've been carrying
>> this patch series for over a year -- it's not high priority --
>> this seems like a good time finally to post it.
>>
>> I've been removing if-before-free tests for a few years now.
>> Here are some of the projects that have endured this janitorial work:
> You know, it probably wouldn't be that hard to have GCC perform this
> analysis for you using its dataflow framework.  Checking for a free call
> which is dominated by a test if the argument is null would be a pretty
> simple check.

Yeah, I did this for the malloc hoisting patches first but then settled
on changing the Fortran frontend to not emit a NULL test (which it still
does, the patches were not merged).

Richard.

> Jeff
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJNdlqeAAoJEBRtltQi2kC746gIAImSP5BZAQ/d9wF94EQcBsWQ
> Qo4hn+LK6G2h5R2yVwB9dMf4CTZygxnowlFTxtG9QXMlzMCQp61jHJNLJLpgY4Qz
> HLMjPGS8uMUa28pJkeRU0ZIMy5hDGID24F0FChnrpNalBnlCvP0xXsnZEcXi8Ei2
> 3VkOMx87MAnVT0k7omZSnMy2HeKqmnP9xQMGM+ISEAFJuiGYeb5Os3T7IRprJjia
> DSOjSF20O8TTV6543pUrMvdzrEYtTTmsv1UKejiyGMDpHrs2qNHsyqiFBO/FLGLA
> bdNplowv5xTTrlPy/4zYXewvl3XLr8okrk8/c0Y4dIKq/g5jIB6pYVXilGSOVa0=
> =WHAM
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>