From: Michael Matz <matz@suse.de>
To: Andrew MacLeod <amacleod@redhat.com>
Cc: Zdenek Dvorak <rakdver@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>,
gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [ssaupdate] Local dominance info
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 16:38:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0410221809130.32225@wotan.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1098310966.20227.24.camel@pain>
Hi,
On Wed, 20 Oct 2004, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> > > This strikes me *much* more as a local thing that an individual pass
> > > might be interested in, and so should number the stmt's itself for the
> > > duration of its interest.
> >
> > Still you would need some mechanism to update things when statements are
> > inserted, so this would make things only more complicated.
>
> and what wrong with the local_dom_insert_after() and
> local_dom_insert_before() which call the bsi routines? It looks pretty
> trivial to do that, then the info only exists and is maintained when
> you want it.
But then you have to ask yourself everytime you add stmts if you want to
use these or the normal inserters. And what about common code which
inserts statements? Do we need two versions of them too?
Generally I think there should be exactly one interface to do something
(inserting stmts), so if maintaining this local numbering doesn't cost
much it would be much cleaner to do this, instead of relying on special
case code.
Why exactly would you like to have this keeping of information be factored
out?
> I don't see any reason why it should be kept up to date all the time
> when virtually no-one else cares about it.
Cleanlyness of interfaces? Less potential for funny bugs because the
wrong inserters were used by some common code?
Ciao,
Michael.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-10-22 16:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-10-19 21:54 Zdenek Dvorak
2004-10-20 13:32 ` Andrew MacLeod
2004-10-20 19:35 ` Zdenek Dvorak
2004-10-20 22:26 ` Andrew MacLeod
2004-10-20 22:54 ` Zdenek Dvorak
2004-10-21 3:06 ` Jeffrey A Law
2004-10-22 16:38 ` Michael Matz [this message]
2004-10-22 17:05 ` Andrew MacLeod
2004-10-22 21:33 ` Zdenek Dvorak
2004-10-22 21:47 ` Andrew MacLeod
2004-10-21 10:25 ` Paolo Bonzini
2004-10-21 10:53 ` Zdenek Dvorak
2004-10-21 10:54 ` Paolo Bonzini
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=Pine.LNX.4.58.0410221809130.32225@wotan.suse.de \
--to=matz@suse.de \
--cc=amacleod@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=rakdver@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz \
/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).