From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-93473-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 14100 invoked by alias); 26 Mar 2004 15:30:18 -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 14085 invoked from network); 26 Mar 2004 15:30:17 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 26 Mar 2004 15:30:17 -0000
Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254])
	by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i2QFUD1X023010;
	Fri, 26 Mar 2004 10:30:13 -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 i2QFUDj06987;
	Fri, 26 Mar 2004 10:30:13 -0500
Received: from [10.0.0.106] (dnovillo.cipe.redhat.com [10.0.0.106])
	by pobox.toronto.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i2QFUBf7014552;
	Fri, 26 Mar 2004 10:30:12 -0500
Subject: Re: [tree-ssa vs lno] who is right?
From: Diego Novillo <dnovillo@redhat.com>
To: Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>
Cc: Dale Johannesen <dalej@apple.com>,
        "gcc@gcc.gnu.org list" <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <200403261528.i2QFSHL5014148@speedy.slc.redhat.com>
References: <200403261528.i2QFSHL5014148@speedy.slc.redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Organization: Red Hat Canada
Message-Id: <1080315003.4600.110.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 17:42:00 -0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2004-03/txt/msg01554.txt.bz2

On Fri, 2004-03-26 at 10:28, law@redhat.com wrote:

> Why would that be a bug?  It just means that we have overlapping lifetimes
> for the two objects. 
> 
Yeah, I was smoking FUD chains again.


Diego.