From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31908 invoked by alias); 9 Dec 2003 06:52:34 -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 31892 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2003 06:52:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 9 Dec 2003 06:52:33 -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 hB96qW218980; Tue, 9 Dec 2003 01:52:32 -0500 Received: from speedy.slc.redhat.com (vpn50-3.rdu.redhat.com [172.16.50.3]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id hB96qT216136; Tue, 9 Dec 2003 01:52:29 -0500 Received: from redhat.com (law@localhost) by speedy.slc.redhat.com (8.12.10/8.12.8/Submit) with ESMTP id hB96qQk6030230; Mon, 8 Dec 2003 23:52:26 -0700 Message-Id: <200312090652.hB96qQk6030230@speedy.slc.redhat.com> X-Authentication-Warning: speedy.slc.redhat.com: law owned process doing -bs To: Steven Bosscher cc: Jan Hubicka , "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, dnovillo@redhat.com Reply-To: law@redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC] Use accessor macros for the head and end of a basic block In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 09 Dec 2003 07:49:12 +0100." <200312090749.12424.steven@gcc.gnu.org> From: law@redhat.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2003 09:28:00 -0000 X-SW-Source: 2003-12/txt/msg00569.txt.bz2 In message <200312090749.12424.steven@gcc.gnu.org>, Steven Bosscher writes: >On Tuesday 09 December 2003 05:05, law@redhat.com wrote: >> I would _strongly_ recommend this go into the mainline first > >Of course. Where did I say [tree-ssa] in the subject line? > >I take it you do not dislike the idea of putting this kind of patch on >mainline in this stage? For mainline, I'm more than happy to leave it up to Mark :-) I've got no strong opinions there. jeff