From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-425083-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 7727 invoked by alias); 19 Apr 2016 12:15:49 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 7696 invoked by uid 89); 19 Apr 2016 12:15:49 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=D*adacore.com, U*ebotcazou, botcazou, ebotcazouadacorecom
X-HELO: mail-wm0-f50.google.com
Received: from mail-wm0-f50.google.com (HELO mail-wm0-f50.google.com) (74.125.82.50) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 12:15:38 +0000
Received: by mail-wm0-f50.google.com with SMTP id e201so11471921wme.0        for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 05:15:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;        d=1e100.net; s=20130820;        h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date         :message-id:subject:from:to:cc;        bh=kh555vhHr+v1TMqEIfRmDBQaJsX+NZGISFZqAOrjD4g=;        b=D5dBBTqJrAPLBHfYCyXlYXu/liMrIMmDYN8jk++LeawMKhYnlOS6o/Qa2PrWx+rWbH         rjHpJipri8y40itppESBHjDS4RzJdOe/ITZARjtPLJSYS88beA6TglhxjSU4x5eIJQTK         /TlB+tKOK0+tLDC6oi7ygojA1S/mg4MSxVieu5dUKabdhCYz8uCupjJGU0MutcGN+4Ht         odGiH4SDd9F1nnIM5EtiKHUbIkDq+5pkc37zl4PPirfW4PX6+VcrTaseAoHzSr9AkVhk         X+kwGP4YOC09w+6HNnEhomps2H/++8lwtcyhpA99m84NxFNjn/a8gFUSaBedtDhXQKeZ         jZig==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FX7QVT17QnBAo7ByLUTWennRLmzRXLZAriJZaAMSF8WBAGUK4L3IKKTNdiAbvcYZq5noABxIPaaKcYeIw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.28.55.139 with SMTP id e133mr3365004wma.98.1461068135925; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 05:15:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.113.102 with HTTP; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 05:15:35 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <2534618.iBp7sehdo0@polaris>
References: <alpine.LSU.2.11.1602181335560.1392@t29.fhfr.qr>	<2534618.iBp7sehdo0@polaris>
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 12:15:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAFiYyc1GLcLcRwLQ2qLm7ZepgZkiEVqtFnnsuftgq8_x0NAMbA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][GCC7] Remove scaling of COMPONENT_REF/ARRAY_REF ops 2/3
From: Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>
To: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou@adacore.com>
Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2016-04/txt/msg00924.txt.bz2

On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 9:33 AM, Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou@adacore.com> wrote:
>> The following experiment resulted from looking at making
>> array_ref_low_bound and array_ref_element_size non-mutating.  Again
>> I wondered why we do this strange scaling by offset/element alignment.
>
> I personally never really grasped it either...
>
>> So - I hope somebody from Adacore can evaluate this patch code-generation
>> wise.
>
> I will, this looks like a valuable simplification to me.

Did you manage to do this yet?  I'm flushing my stage1 queue of
"simple cleanups" right now.

Thanks,
Richard.