-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05/02/11 15:18, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
>> For (edge *)xmalloc (sizeof (edge) * 1) use XNEWVEC and friends.
>> I wonder if it makes sense to use a VEC instead (will the vector
>> be of variable size?). Maybe wrap accesses to e->aux with
>> a ma
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05/02/11 15:40, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
> I've got no opinion on using a VEC if folks chime in with the request,
> I'll make that change.
>
>> If it's fixed size there's no need for a VEC, it would be just overhead.
VEC adds checking, which can
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 17:34, Jeff Law wrote:
> I've got no opinion on using a VEC if folks chime in with the request,
> I'll make that change.
I have a slight preference for VEC by default.
Diego.
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 11:34 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 05/02/11 15:18, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
>>
>>> For (edge *)xmalloc (sizeof (edge) * 1) use XNEWVEC and friends.
> Yup. Good catch. Will fix. Old habits die hard.
>
>>> I wonder if it make
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05/02/11 15:18, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
>> For (edge *)xmalloc (sizeof (edge) * 1) use XNEWVEC and friends.
Yup. Good catch. Will fix. Old habits die hard.
>> I wonder if it makes sense to use a VEC instead (will the vector
>> be of variable
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 7:07 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> This is merely an infrastructure patch in preparation for another
> improvement in the jump threading code. It shouldn't affect the code we
> generate at all.
>
> Let's consider this CFG (from
