From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 318 invoked by alias); 3 Mar 2003 22:20:48 -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 310 invoked from network); 3 Mar 2003 22:20:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca) (132.246.100.193) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 3 Mar 2003 22:20:47 -0000 Received: from hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca (8.12.0.Beta16/8.12.0.Beta16) with ESMTP id h23MKjtI015575; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 17:20:46 -0500 (EST) Received: (from dave@localhost) by hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca (8.12.0.Beta16/8.12.0.Beta16) id h23MKjsE015574; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 17:20:45 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <200303032220.h23MKjsE015574@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> Subject: Re: Is the loop pass allowed to introduce new call insns? To: rth@redhat.com (Richard Henderson) Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 23:12:00 -0000 From: "John David Anglin" Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20030303214642.GC12472@redhat.com> from "Richard Henderson" at Mar 3, 2003 01:46:42 pm MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg00130.txt.bz2 > Not sure what to do about this... Maybe I can stop this by adding "!virtuals_instantiated" to the condition for the various call expanders. Dave -- J. David Anglin dave.anglin@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca National Research Council of Canada (613) 990-0752 (FAX: 952-6605)