On Thu, 2011-09-29 at 10:03 +0100, Tobias Grosser wrote:
> On 09/29/2011 09:58 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 12:10 AM, William J. Schmidt
> > wrote:
> >> Hi there,
> >>
> >> Ping. I'm seeking approval for this fix on trunk and 4_6-branch.
> >> Thanks!
> >
> > Ok.
> Yes,
On 09/29/2011 09:58 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 12:10 AM, William J. Schmidt
wrote:
Hi there,
Ping. I'm seeking approval for this fix on trunk and 4_6-branch.
Thanks!
Ok.
Yes, also looks good from me. Though, you may want to move the forward
declaration after the "
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 12:10 AM, William J. Schmidt
wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> Ping. I'm seeking approval for this fix on trunk and 4_6-branch.
> Thanks!
Ok.
Thanks,
Richard.
> Bill
>
> On Tue, 2011-09-13 at 17:55 -0500, William J. Schmidt wrote:
>> Greetings,
>>
>> The code to build scops (stati
Hi there,
Ping. I'm seeking approval for this fix on trunk and 4_6-branch.
Thanks!
Bill
On Tue, 2011-09-13 at 17:55 -0500, William J. Schmidt wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> The code to build scops (static control parts) for graphite first
> rewrites loops into canonical loop-closed SSA form. PR50183
Greetings,
The code to build scops (static control parts) for graphite first
rewrites loops into canonical loop-closed SSA form. PR50183 identifies
a scenario where the results do not fulfill all required invariants of
this form. In particular, a value defined inside a loop and used
outside that