* Sebastian Pop:
> Steve Ellcey wrote:
>>
>> In the meantime I would be interested in any opinions people have on
>> what level we should be writing things out at. Generic? Gimple? RTL?
>
> Or just dumping plain C code? This is almost what the pretty printers
> are doing, and the way back to
Steve Ellcey wrote:
>
> In the meantime I would be interested in any opinions people have on
> what level we should be writing things out at. Generic? Gimple? RTL?
Or just dumping plain C code? This is almost what the pretty printers
are doing, and the way back to the compiler is already ther
On 10/12/05, Diego Novillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Monday 10 October 2005 19:25, Steve Ellcey wrote:
>
> > Could we just have -fwrite-ipo create a '.o' file that contains the
> > intermediate representation (instead of being a real object file).
> >
> > Then when the linker is called it wou
On Monday 10 October 2005 19:25, Steve Ellcey wrote:
> Could we just have -fwrite-ipo create a '.o' file that contains the
> intermediate representation (instead of being a real object file).
>
> Then when the linker is called it would call the compiler with all the
> files that have intermediate
> > Second question is - When to put info on the disk? Few alternatives,
> > 1) Before gimplfication
> > 2) Before optimizing tree-ssa
> > 3) After tree-ssa optimization is complete
> > 4) Immediately after generating RTL
> > 5) Halfway throuh RTL passes
> > etc.. And answer to this question largel
Thanks to everyone who replied to my mail, I am currently waiting for
some follow-ups to replies I got off-list. In the mean time I wonder if
we could talk about Devang's questions on what this might look like to
a user.
> From: Devang Patel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> It is useful to get clear under
On 10/7/05, Steve Ellcey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> In the meantime I would be interested in any opinions people have on
> what level we should be writing things out at. Generic? Gimple? RTL?
> (Just kidding on that last one.) Also any opinions on what format to
> write things out in
On Saturday 08 October 2005 01:23, Steve Ellcey wrote:
> I would like to start by getting any input and advice the members of the
> GCC community might have for me.
This may be a totally stupid idea, but perhaps you can start with
writing a new PCH format that is not just a memory dump but a real
Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > Generic but you might want to start by trying to define a type
| > system first.
| >
|
| Actually, we shouldn't be writing out any of them, at least in their
| current form.
|
| (IE it shouldn't be pickled trees)
I strongly agree.
-- Gaby
On 10/8/05, Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Generic but you might want to start by trying to define a type
> > system first.
Why not gimple?
> Actually, we shouldn't be writing out any of them, at least in their
> current form.
>
> (IE it shouldn't be pickled trees)
Or even dump SSA
> Generic but you might want to start by trying to define a type
> system first.
>
Actually, we shouldn't be writing out any of them, at least in their
current form.
(IE it shouldn't be pickled trees)
> -- Pinski
>
> I have been given some time by my management to work on creating a
> framework for IPO optimizations in GCC by creating an intermediate file
> reader and writer for GCC.
>
> I would like to start by getting any input and advice the members of the
> GCC community might have for me. I would al
I have been given some time by my management to work on creating a
framework for IPO optimizations in GCC by creating an intermediate file
reader and writer for GCC.
I would like to start by getting any input and advice the members of the
GCC community might have for me. I would also like to see
13 matches
Mail list logo
