From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7843 invoked by alias); 13 May 2003 15:23:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 7813 invoked from network); 13 May 2003 15:23:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu) (128.122.140.213) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 13 May 2003 15:23:37 -0000 Received: by vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (4.1/1.34) id AA14941; Tue, 13 May 03 11:28:22 EDT Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 15:23:00 -0000 From: kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner) Message-Id: <10305131528.AA14941@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> To: mszick@goquest.com Subject: Re: [tree-ssa] Out of SSA status and issues Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg01315.txt.bz2 Consider instead that '*p' is just the name given a register's contents. Neither 'i' nor '9' are processor internal. Both are external to the cpu. The memory reference for 'i' is source code implicit, the memory reference for '*p' is source code explicit. True, but given caching effects, it's hard to see how *p could be less expensive than 'i'.