[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Kenner) writes: | The whole point of the gimplifier is to avoid making too many restrictions on | what are valid trees: it's GIMPLE where we want to make those restrictions. | It seems very duplicative to me to say that the process of creating | temporaries for certain expressable trees is the job of the front end and for | others is the job of the gimplifier? Why not just be consistent and say it's | the gimplifier's job to do all of them?
I tend to agree with Kenner's point. However, we must also ensure that some language s[ecific constructs -- temporary lifetime, etc -- are properly dealt with front-ends so that (1) we don't "bloat" the gimplifier; (2) updates to the gimplifier are language-neutral. -- Gaby
