From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-87394-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 13211 invoked by alias); 15 Dec 2003 19:20:53 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 13204 invoked from network); 15 Dec 2003 19:20:52 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 15 Dec 2003 19:20:52 -0000
Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254])
	by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id hBFJKph02481;
	Mon, 15 Dec 2003 14:20:51 -0500
Received: from pobox.toronto.redhat.com (pobox.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.4])
	by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id hBFJKon09718;
	Mon, 15 Dec 2003 14:20:50 -0500
Received: from to-dhcp1.toronto.redhat.com (to-dhcp1.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.101])
	by pobox.toronto.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id hBFJKnlJ030655;
	Mon, 15 Dec 2003 14:20:49 -0500
Subject: Re: [tree-ssa] Lazy updating of stmt operands
From: Diego Novillo <dnovillo@redhat.com>
To: Andrew Macleod <amacleod@redhat.com>
Cc: Zdenek Dvorak <rakdver@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>,
   Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>, gcc mailing list <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <1071515090.3354.1681.camel@p4>
References: <1070818186.7334.30.camel@frodo.toronto.redhat.com>
	 <200312111936.hBBJabGj024859@speedy.slc.redhat.com>
	 <20031211223056.GA20061@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>
	 <1071515090.3354.1681.camel@p4>
Content-Type: text/plain
Organization: Red Hat Canada
Message-Id: <1071516068.22579.98.camel@frodo.toronto.redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 19:28:00 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2003-12/txt/msg00805.txt.bz2

On Mon, 2003-12-15 at 14:04, Andrew MacLeod wrote:

> Diego, default defs have a (void *)0 stmt, but we can still attach a
> stmt annotation to them right? (ie, they arent shared) We need to be
> able to, so you better say yes :-)
> 
Oh, OK.  If you insist.  Yes, tree-ssa.c:get_reaching_def.


Diego.