From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1523 invoked by alias); 10 Dec 2003 22:16:19 -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 1503 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2003 22:16:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.73.237.138) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 10 Dec 2003 22:16:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 12954 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2003 22:10:13 -0000 Received: from dhcp48.icir.org (HELO taltos.codesourcery.com) (zack@192.150.187.48) by mail.codesourcery.com with DES-CBC3-SHA encrypted SMTP; 10 Dec 2003 22:10:13 -0000 Received: by taltos.codesourcery.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 10 Dec 2003 14:16:14 -0800 From: "Zack Weinberg" To: Steven Bosscher Cc: mark@codesourcery.com, law@redhat.com, Jan Hubicka , "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, dnovillo@redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC] Use accessor macros for the head and end of a basic block References: <200312090652.hB96qQk6030230@speedy.slc.redhat.com> <200312100857.49315.steven@gcc.gnu.org> Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 22:49:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <200312100857.49315.steven@gcc.gnu.org> (Steven Bosscher's message of "Wed, 10 Dec 2003 08:57:49 +0100") Message-ID: <87he08wc7l.fsf@codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2003-12/txt/msg00637.txt.bz2 Steven Bosscher writes: > On Tuesday 09 December 2003 07:52, law@redhat.com wrote: >> 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. > > Here is the full patch for mainline, bootstrapped (c,c++,objc,f77) and > checked on i686-pc-linux-gnu. Very mechanical, in all. I renamed the > head and end field to make sure no-one uses it again and gets away with > it unpunished... > > OK for mainline? Once it's there I'll do the same for tree-ssa. Since Mark is out of town, since this is extremely mechanical and low risk, and since divergence between mainline and tree-ssa is undesirable here, I am willing to approve this patch for mainline - but it comes right back out again if it causes the slightest bit of trouble, capische? zw