On 2/28/08 8:03 AM, Kenneth Zadeck wrote:
The big difference between what i am proposing with birthpoints and a full blown ssa implementation is that i plan to do no rewriting since there are no operands of the phis to support this.
You don't need to do a rewriting SSA implementation to have PHI nodes with operands. FUD chains fully support PHI nodes with operands.
I believe that what i am proposing is actually currently called (or at least related to) factored use def chains, but i need to read up on the literature to see if they really are the same.
Yes, they are. FUD chains are what I initially used on GIMPLE, but they do not allow overlapping live ranges for different SSA names of the same symbol, so for GIMPLE registers I implemented the basic rewriting form and for memory symbols I implemented FUD chains (the SSA web over VDEF/VUSEs are FUD chains).
If we are not going to use a rewriting SSA form, I believe that the original problems we had with RTL-SSA can be avoided.
Diego.
