From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6516 invoked by alias); 29 Oct 2011 15:58:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 6507 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Oct 2011 15:58:42 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 29 Oct 2011 15:58:23 +0000 Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p9TFwLGs009109 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sat, 29 Oct 2011 11:58:21 -0400 Received: from pebble.twiddle.home (vpn-236-92.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.236.92]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p9TFwLqS025152; Sat, 29 Oct 2011 11:58:21 -0400 Message-ID: <4EAC229D.8090701@redhat.com> Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2011 21:30:00 -0000 From: Richard Henderson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.23) Gecko/20110928 Fedora/3.1.15-1.fc14 Thunderbird/3.1.15 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Peter Bigot CC: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: approaches to carry-flag modelling in RTL References: <4EAADF8F.2090002@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2011-10/txt/msg00524.txt.bz2 On 10/29/2011 05:41 AM, Peter Bigot wrote: > It seems cc0 should probably still be preferred for CISC-style > architectures like the MSP430. I'll give that approach a try. I think that's somewhat unfair. Take a close look at the RX and mn10300 ports -- they're what I would call the most up-to-date of the cisc-y ports. r~