------- Additional Comments From joseph at codesourcery dot com 2005-02-21 17:34 ------- Subject: Re: paradoxical subreg problem
On Mon, 21 Feb 2005, law at redhat dot com wrote: > > Jeff Law had a patch at <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2002-01/msg01872.html>. > > The discussion doesn't indicate anything in particular wrong with it, > > was there some reason it wasn't applied? > I don't think we ever came to a solid decision about which approach > was better. My patch was simpler, but there may have been other > cases that Alan's patch handled that mine didn't. > > I do think we all agreed that (subreg (mem)) was evil :-) > > I think the fact that unrelated changes masked all these issues and > as a result this has been largely ignored for the last few years. Perhaps we should apply both patches to eliminate this latent bug or bugs and allow the PR to be closed? (After 4.0 branches given that the bug is apparently latent at present so we shouldn't need to risk these patches in 4.0.) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5169
