From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31533 invoked by alias); 7 Dec 2003 16:19:31 -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 31521 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2003 16:19:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz) (195.113.31.123) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 7 Dec 2003 16:19:30 -0000 Received: by atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz (Postfix, from userid 29025) id E69E64C0272; Sun, 7 Dec 2003 17:19:29 +0100 (CET) Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 16:22:00 -0000 From: Zdenek Dvorak To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [tree-ssa] Lazy updating of stmt operands Message-ID: <20031207161929.GA10638@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i X-SW-Source: 2003-12/txt/msg00469.txt.bz2 Hello, what is the purpose of having lists of stmt operands updated on demand? I thought that it is for performance reasons, but this seems not to be the case as all the statements are anyway scanned in the final dce pass, so they end up in updated forms and we cannot gain anything elsewhere. Why I am interested in this is that it prevents us from having also def-use edges (immediate uses) provided explicitly, which would be convenient in two cases I have encountered recently. Zdenek