From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29262 invoked by alias); 9 Dec 2003 06:46:55 -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 29243 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2003 06:46:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhost2.tudelft.nl) (130.161.180.2) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 9 Dec 2003 06:46:54 -0000 Received: from 127.0.0.1 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rav.antivirus (Postfix) with SMTP id 26EB95777; Tue, 9 Dec 2003 07:46:54 +0100 (MET) Received: from listserv.tudelft.nl (listserv.tudelft.nl [130.161.180.33]) by mailhost2.tudelft.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FAE51F13; Tue, 9 Dec 2003 07:46:54 +0100 (MET) Received: from steven.lr-s.tudelft.nl (hekje1.shuis.tudelft.nl [145.94.192.78]) by listserv.tudelft.nl (8.12.10/8.12.8) with ESMTP id hB96krQP002789; Tue, 9 Dec 2003 07:46:53 +0100 (MET) Received: by steven.lr-s.tudelft.nl (Postfix, from userid 500) id BE5595CCEC; Tue, 9 Dec 2003 07:49:12 +0100 (CET) From: Steven Bosscher Organization: SUSE Labs To: law@redhat.com, Jan Hubicka Subject: Re: [RFC] Use accessor macros for the head and end of a basic block Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2003 06:52:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 Cc: "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, dnovillo@redhat.com References: <200312090405.hB945g4m016730@speedy.slc.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <200312090405.hB945g4m016730@speedy.slc.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200312090749.12424.steven@gcc.gnu.org> X-SW-Source: 2003-12/txt/msg00568.txt.bz2 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? Gr. Steven