From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-142396-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 29947 invoked by alias); 27 Nov 2007 16:51:48 -0000
Received: (qmail 29932 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Nov 2007 16:51:46 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mx2.suse.de (HELO mx2.suse.de) (195.135.220.15)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 27 Nov 2007 16:51:39 +0000
Received: from Relay1.suse.de (mail2.suse.de [195.135.221.8]) 	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) 	(No client certificate requested) 	by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 536C327CA9; 	Tue, 27 Nov 2007 17:51:36 +0100 (CET)
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 18:33:00 -0000
From: Michael Matz <matz@suse.de>
To: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>
Cc: Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>, 	Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com>, 	Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com>, 	gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Designs for better debug info in GCC
In-Reply-To: <or3ausedjk.fsf@oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0711271750340.23011@wotan.suse.de>
References: <or4pg114h5.fsf@oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>  <84fc9c000711050327x74845c78ya18a3329fcf9e4d2@mail.gmail.com>  <or7ikuv6ex.fsf_-_@oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br> <m3d4umrq04.fsf@localhost.localdomain>  <orfxzhuazm.fsf@oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br> <m3mytpr7fr.fsf@localhost.localdomain>  <4732519C.6070802@codesourcery.com> <or640dfg4g.fsf@oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>  <4733554D.4040402@codesourcery.com> <or8x586ymz.fsf@oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>  <4737BBBF.3080400@codesourcery.com> <oroddzxsfy.fsf@oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>  <Pine.LNX.4.64.0711131523290.23011@wotan.suse.de> <ord4u0k20x.fsf@oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>  <Pine.LNX.4.64.0711261754570.23011@wotan.suse.de> <or3ausedjk.fsf@oliva.athome.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
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: 2007-11/txt/msg00726.txt.bz2

Hi,

On Mon, 26 Nov 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:

> >> And then, you have to tweak everything else to keep the note that
> >> replaced the set up to date as you further optimize the code.
> 
> > No.  remove_insn() would replace the SET with a note.
> 
> What information would this note convey?

Oh my, sorry for adding confusion to the topic: I meant to write "would 
_not_ replace the SET with a note".


Ciao,
Michael.