------- Comment #12 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-15 09:02
-------
Why do you think refering to other debug stmts decl is not a good idea? I
was thinking of simplifying propagation into debug stmts by simply replacing
all uses of a to-become dead SSA name with a non-artificial decl with its
underlying declaration. So,
i_1 = j_2 + k_3;
# DEBUG i <= i_1
# DEBUG foo <= i_1 + 1
on removing i_1 becomes
# DEBUG i <= j_1 + k_3
# DEBUG foo <= i + 1
based on the fact that we better had a debug stmt for i already.
In fact I can't see how this is different from what you propose. And in
fact your proposal effectively would do
# DEBUG tmp0 <= j_1 + k_3
# DEBUG i <= tmp0
# DEBUG foo <= tmp0 + 1
effectively adding a new debug stmt for each regular stmt you remove.
I don't think that's going to fly.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot
| |org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41343
