public inbox for gcc@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Matz <matz@suse.de>
To: Diego Novillo <dnovillo@google.com>
Cc: Sandeep Soni <soni.sandeepb@gmail.com>,	GCC LIST <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Design Considerations of GIMPLE Front End
Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 14:00:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1005181552080.1097@wotan.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinYaCqkx4t9ixI3y3XAm8lyF7dqnJloorgdy9kL@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

On Tue, 18 May 2010, Diego Novillo wrote:

> On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 16:15, Sandeep Soni <soni.sandeepb@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > 1. What should be the format of representation of the GIMPLE tuples in 
> >    text?
> 
> I liked Andrew's suggestion about S-expressions.

I can see that for describing types, maybe.  But isn't that artificially 
awkward for representing tuple instructions?  I mean most instructions 
will look like

  (= i_1 (+ k_1 m_1))
or
  (= j_1 (call func arg1 arg2))

I don't see how that is much easier to parse compared to
  i_1 = k_1 + m_1
  j_1 = func (arg1, arg2)

The nice thing with tuples is that there's always only one operator, and 
hence no ambiguity in precedence that needs to be resolved or explicitely 
encoded via a list structure.

Or is the format also intended to be able to represent GENERIC, i.e. 
deeply nested structures?


Ciao,
Michael.

  reply	other threads:[~2010-05-18 14:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-05-17 20:21 Sandeep Soni
2010-05-17 21:04 ` Andrew Haley
2010-05-18  3:25   ` Sandeep Soni
2010-05-18  8:39     ` Andrew Haley
2010-05-18 13:18 ` Diego Novillo
2010-05-18 14:00   ` Michael Matz [this message]
2010-05-18 14:09     ` Diego Novillo
2010-05-18 14:18       ` Steven Bosscher
2010-05-18 14:46         ` Dave Korn
2010-05-18 14:52           ` Andrew Haley
     [not found]             ` <AANLkTilQWdLDrQypzwqbzTKsUYKyPKMvHMKVClFvZJWH@mail.gmail.com>
2010-05-18 15:04               ` Diego Novillo
2010-05-18 15:24                 ` Sandeep Soni
2010-05-18 14:30     ` Basile Starynkevitch
2010-05-18 14:32       ` Richard Guenther
2010-05-18 14:47       ` Steven Bosscher
2010-06-04  8:24 ` Sebastian Pop

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.4.64.1005181552080.1097@wotan.suse.de \
    --to=matz@suse.de \
    --cc=dnovillo@google.com \
    --cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=soni.sandeepb@gmail.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).