On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 07:18:16PM +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Apr 2011, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> > Certainly vec.h never uses spaces; I thought this was simply The Way
> > Things Were.
>
> I also had the impression that for certain special macros such as VEC,
> GTY, _, N_, G_ - macros
On Tue, 5 Apr 2011, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 01:22:39PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> > On Tue, 2011-04-05 at 04:44 -0700, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> > > > nit; You're missing some whitespace here (after the VEC).
> > >
> > > This doesn't seem to be a hard-and-fast policy; all
On Apr 5, 2011, at 5:55 AM, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> IMO, rototils are generally pointless.
As a counter point, I like polish and style, in addition to beauty and
flexibility. I'd rather see more style cleanups, more polish cleanups and more
beautiful cleanups. I'd like to see more, not less
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/05/11 05:44, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 12:01:09PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
>>> + canon_modify_mem_list = GCNEWVEC (VEC(modify_pair,heap) *,
>>> + last_basic_block);
>> nit; You're missing some whit
On Tue, 2011-04-05 at 07:07 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 04/05/11 06:55, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 2011-04-05 at 05:30 -0700, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> >> On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 01:22:39PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> >>> On Tue,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/05/11 06:55, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2011-04-05 at 05:30 -0700, Nathan Froyd wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 01:22:39PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2011-04-05 at 04:44 -0700, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> nit; You're mis
On Tue, 2011-04-05 at 05:30 -0700, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 01:22:39PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> > On Tue, 2011-04-05 at 04:44 -0700, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> > > > nit; You're missing some whitespace here (after the VEC).
> > >
> > > This doesn't seem to be a hard-and-fa
On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 01:22:39PM +0100, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-04-05 at 04:44 -0700, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> > > nit; You're missing some whitespace here (after the VEC).
> >
> > This doesn't seem to be a hard-and-fast policy; all of the VEC code I
> > remember writing or looking a
On Tue, 2011-04-05 at 04:44 -0700, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 12:01:09PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> > > + canon_modify_mem_list = GCNEWVEC (VEC(modify_pair,heap) *,
> > > + last_basic_block);
> > nit; You're missing some whitespace here (after the VEC)
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 12:01:09PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> > + canon_modify_mem_list = GCNEWVEC (VEC(modify_pair,heap) *,
> > + last_basic_block);
> nit; You're missing some whitespace here (after the VEC).
This doesn't seem to be a hard-and-fast policy; all of the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/03/11 19:44, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> The patch below converts gcse.c:canon_modify_mem_list to hold VECs
> instead of EXPR_LIST rtxes. I am ambivalent about the use of VECs in
> canon_modify_mem_list; they will waste some memory compared to the
> l
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 05:42:42PM +0200, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> Nice cleanup. I can't approve it but it looks alright to me. I suppose
> you're planning something similar for modify_mem_list?
That's the plan, along with numerous other users of {INSN,EXPR}_LIST.
-Nathan
Hi Nathan,
Nice cleanup. I can't approve it but it looks alright to me. I suppose
you're planning something similar for modify_mem_list?
Ciao!
Steven
The patch below converts gcse.c:canon_modify_mem_list to hold VECs
instead of EXPR_LIST rtxes. I am ambivalent about the use of VECs in
canon_modify_mem_list; they will waste some memory compared to the
linked list scheme present before, though I'm not sure how much. It
would depend on the averag
14 matches
Mail list logo
