Richard Henderson wrote on 04/10/07 20:30: > Perhaps I misunderstood what Diego was proposing, but I > would have thought the subcode would continue to be the > tree PLUS_EXPR, and not a GS_PLUS something.
Yes. > With that, build_foldN does essentially what we want, > without having to regenerate tree nodes on the input side. Sure, but things will be different if/when the operands stop being 'tree'.
