From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jamie Lokier <jamie.lokier@cern.ch>
To: Greg McGary <gkm@eng.ascend.com>
Cc: law@cygnus.com, Joern Rennecke <amylaar@cygnus.co.uk>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Need advice on bounds checking approaches
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 17:27:00 -0000
Message-id: <20000325022702.E23765@pcep-jamie.cern.ch>
References: <22486.953942953@upchuck> <msvh2byiu2.fsf@gkm-dsl-194.ascend.com>
X-SW-Source: 2000-03/msg00663.html

Greg McGary wrote:
> > We have kicked around the idea of two levels of RTL where we do some
> > optimizations on the higher level RTL, then drop down to a lower level
> > RTL.
> 
> Perhaps I could do that in a limited way, by adding a BP-specific
> optimization pass after loop optimization that eliminates redundant
> checks and expands "check_bounds" into primitive RTL for targets that
> don't HAVE_check_bounds.  Could that pass muster?

The general idea works ok for constant_p.  But that is removed
relatively early.

-- Jamie