From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-176706-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 31989 invoked by alias); 16 Nov 2012 17:31:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 31980 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Nov 2012 17:31:34 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,KHOP_RCVD_TRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE,TW_TM
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail-wg0-f51.google.com (HELO mail-wg0-f51.google.com) (74.125.82.51)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 16 Nov 2012 17:31:28 +0000
Received: by mail-wg0-f51.google.com with SMTP id ed3so1213377wgb.8        for <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>; Fri, 16 Nov 2012 09:31:27 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.180.92.103 with SMTP id cl7mr6225108wib.16.1353087086910; Fri, 16 Nov 2012 09:31:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.217.64.194 with HTTP; Fri, 16 Nov 2012 09:31:26 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1211161529030.21868@wotan.suse.de>
References: <CAGqM8fZbnET=4GGrBt-sXJ-jweTxYYLAGdaYuzK2HfiwCi7K=A@mail.gmail.com>	<alpine.LNX.2.00.1211151523550.21868@wotan.suse.de>	<CAD_=9DSQ2AdOaEgpJpm7RAAR9EJSWemHRmq6khno6hF9mejE=g@mail.gmail.com>	<alpine.LNX.2.00.1211161529030.21868@wotan.suse.de>
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 17:31:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CA+=Sn1khtkyja9Nbr31WQ6f5-vC4FNRiAp4AvDRaJqT=agTeUg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Simplifying Gimple Generation
From: Andrew Pinski <pinskia@gmail.com>
To: Michael Matz <matz@suse.de>
Cc: Diego Novillo <dnovillo@google.com>, Lawrence Crowl <crowl@googlers.com>, 	"gcc@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2012-11/txt/msg00261.txt.bz2

On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 6:30 AM, Michael Matz <matz@suse.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 16 Nov 2012, Diego Novillo wrote:
>
>> > I think consistency should trump brevity here, so also add a tree code for
>> > the converter, i.e.
>> >   ssa_stmt b = q.stmt (NOP_EXPR, shadow_type, a);
>>
>> Ah, yes.  This one was amusing.  When we were drafting the proposal,
>> Lawrence kept wondering what this NOP_EXPR thing is.  I've been
>> suffering this name for so long, that it no longer irritates me.  Had
>> it been named CAST_EXPR, or even NOP_CAST_EXPR, he would have probably
>> kept it in the example code :)
>
> We have CONVERT_EXPR, but it currently doesn't do _quite_ the same as
> NOP_EXPR.  I once wanted to merge them (with CONVERT_EXPR surviving), but
> it stalled somewhere, couple years ago.

I think the only difference now is in the front-ends IIRC.  Everything
else has been merged with respect to CONVERT_EXPR and NOP_EXPR.  So we
should recommend using CONVERT_EXPR in new code.

Thanks,
Andrew Pinski