http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26854
--- Comment #123 from Daniel Berlin 2011-01-18
14:54:33 UTC ---
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 9:49 AM, hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26854
>
> Jan Hubicka changed:
>
> What |Removed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26854
--- Comment #125 from Daniel Berlin 2011-01-18
15:18:25 UTC ---
>
> --- Comment #124 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-18 15:15:01
> UTC ---
>>
>> This looks suspiciously like it's not using the DFS numbers
> It seems that they are used, just we do a lo
IRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: dberlin at gcc dot gnu.org
The store sinking algorithm in tree-ssa-sink.c has grown to the point where it
is *almost*, but not exactly, equivale
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32120
--- Comment #8 from Daniel Berlin 2012-03-05
17:20:36 UTC ---
I still have an unfinished patch to convert SCCVN to
http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=512536
This actually makes it significantly easier to integrate better
congruence finding (and l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18487
--- Comment #17 from Daniel Berlin ---
Not sure how i ended up on the CC list for this one, but i actually
would disagree it would be better than nothing.
Features that can only be made to work a small amount and are
incapable of being improved t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18487
--- Comment #25 from Daniel Berlin ---
This seems like a bad idea, and is impossible in general.
The whole point of the attributes is to tell the compiler things are pure/const
in cases it can't already prove.
It can already prove a lot, and do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18487
--- Comment #29 from Daniel Berlin ---
Let me try to explain a different way:
The only functions GCC can warn about are those that don’t need the
attributes in the first place. The way any warning would work is to detect
whether it is pure/const,
