On Jul 9, 2007, Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Or tell us how you think my patch should be changed.
#define no_new_pseudos (reload_in_progress || reload_completed) if you want to reword it into a functional macro without a negative, then it would take modifying back-ends as well. If so, I guess s,no_new_pseudos,can_gen_reg_rtx (),g or can_gen_new_pseudos() would do. > I think regalloc_started_p is pretty unambiguous. I agree. But the implementation does not match the name, and the name doesn't match the question the back-ends need answered. > If it mattered, we would make it true after local-alloc starts. At > the moment it doesn't matter. But then, if it mattered for some reason unrelated with the ability to create pseudos, would we have to change all uses in back-ends, or live with the additional restriction the change would amount to? -- Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/ Red Hat Compiler Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED], gcc.gnu.org} Free Software Evangelist [EMAIL PROTECTED], gnu.org}
