On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 1:17 PM Alexander Monakov wrote:
>
> On Wed, 29 Aug 2018, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> > On Tue, 28 Aug 2018, Michael Matz wrote:
> > > > I think it's not too complicated, but how about adding this comment:
> > > >
> > > > profile_count m = c1.max (c2);
> > > > /* Return 0
On Wed, 29 Aug 2018, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Aug 2018, Michael Matz wrote:
> > > I think it's not too complicated, but how about adding this comment:
> > >
> > > profile_count m = c1.max (c2);
> > > /* Return 0 if counts are equal, -1 if E1 has the larger count. */
> > > retur
On Tue, 28 Aug 2018, Michael Matz wrote:
> > I think it's not too complicated, but how about adding this comment:
> >
> > profile_count m = c1.max (c2);
> > /* Return 0 if counts are equal, -1 if E1 has the larger count. */
> > return (m == c2) - (m == c1);
> >
> > Or, alternatively, emplo
Hi,
On Tue, 28 Aug 2018, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> > I think your proposed one
> > warrants some comments. Maybe trade speed for some clearer code?
>
> I think it's not too complicated, but how about adding this comment:
>
> profile_count m = c1.max (c2);
> /* Return 0 if counts are equal
On Tue, 28 Aug 2018, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 11:22 AM Alexander Monakov wrote:
> >
> > This converts the use in bb-reorder. I had to get a little bit creative
> > with
> > the comparator as profile_count::operator> does not implement a strict weak
> > order.
>
> So the
On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 11:22 AM Alexander Monakov wrote:
>
> This converts the use in bb-reorder. I had to get a little bit creative with
> the comparator as profile_count::operator> does not implement a strict weak
> order.
So the previously used comparator was invalid? I think your proposed
This converts the use in bb-reorder. I had to get a little bit creative with
the comparator as profile_count::operator> does not implement a strict weak
order.
* gcc/bb-reorder.c (edge_order): Convert to C-qsort-style
tri-state comparator.
(reorder_basic_blocks_simple): Ch
