From: Daniel Berlin <dberlin@dberlin.org>
To: Andrew Haley <aph@cambridge.redhat.com>
Cc: Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>,
Per Bothner <per@bothner.com>, Fergus Henderson <fjh@cs.mu.OZ.AU>,
"gcc@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>,
"java@gcc.gnu.org" <java@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: Java inliner
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 09:13:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0206121156230.15243-100000@dberlin.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <15623.27493.877886.644844@cuddles.cambridge.redhat.com>
On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Andrew Haley wrote:
> Mark Mitchell writes:
> >
> >
> > > I believe the right thing to do in the short term is extend the C/C++
> > > inliner to understand the Java trees. Almost all of the tree codes
> > > encountered will be generic tree codes defined in tree.def.
> >
> > If that is true -- and if languages other than Java are actually using
> > these tree codes -- that is fine.
> >
> > The current inliner already has mechanisms for language-specific
> > extensions. If those can be used, or it can be easily extended so that
> > they can be used, great.
>
> Okay.
>
> > The contention was that the current inliner could *not* be used, and that
> > an entirely new one had to be written.
>
> Not exactly, although some of the structures used in the inliner
> (e.g. statement expressions) aren't going to make my life very easy.
It shouldn't be all that difficult to get rid of the statement
expressions.
In fact, it might be the case that we can just remove the statement
expression wrapper right now, and it'll still just work.
i'll check.
>
> Andrew.
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-06-12 16:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-06-11 7:00 Andrew Haley
2002-06-11 7:25 ` Daniel Berlin
2002-06-11 7:26 ` Andrew Haley
2002-06-11 7:56 ` Fergus Henderson
2002-06-11 9:18 ` Andrew Haley
2002-06-11 9:49 ` Joe Buck
2002-06-11 10:59 ` Andrew Haley
2002-06-11 11:29 ` Diego Novillo
2002-06-11 22:36 ` Mark Mitchell
2002-06-12 2:24 ` Per Bothner
2002-06-12 4:47 ` Andrew Haley
2002-06-12 6:38 ` Mark Mitchell
2002-06-12 8:45 ` Andrew Haley
2002-06-12 9:13 ` Daniel Berlin [this message]
2002-06-12 9:28 ` Daniel Berlin
2002-07-01 11:21 ` Andrew Haley
2002-07-01 11:29 ` Andrew Haley
2002-07-01 11:56 ` RFC: " Daniel Berlin
2002-07-01 11:58 ` Andrew Haley
2002-07-10 5:16 ` Alexandre Oliva
2002-07-10 7:08 ` Andrew Haley
2002-07-10 7:10 ` Alexandre Oliva
2002-07-10 7:32 ` Andrew Haley
2002-07-10 13:41 ` Alexandre Oliva
2002-07-30 9:43 ` Andrew Haley
2002-08-12 10:37 ` Tom Tromey
2002-08-12 10:42 ` Andrew Haley
2002-07-10 9:00 ` Tom Tromey
2002-06-11 8:39 ` profiling shared libraries Taha Mannan Jiruwala
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.44.0206121156230.15243-100000@dberlin.org \
--to=dberlin@dberlin.org \
--cc=aph@cambridge.redhat.com \
--cc=fjh@cs.mu.OZ.AU \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=java@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=mark@codesourcery.com \
--cc=per@bothner.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).