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.
next prev parent 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).