Richard Biener <richard.guent...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 3:32 PM, Trevor Saunders <tbsau...@tbsaunde.org>
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 03:11:14PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2015-09-16 at 09:16 -0400, Trevor Saunders wrote:
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > I gave changing from gimple to gimple * a shot last week. It turned out
>>> > to be not too hard. As you might expect the patch is huge so its
>>> > attached compressed.
>>> >
>>> > patch was bootstrapped + regtested on x86_64-linux-gnu, and run through
>>> > config-list.mk. However I needed to update it some for changes made
>>> > while testing. Do people want to make this change now? If so I'll try
>>> > and commit the patch over the weekend when less is changing.
>>>
>>>
>>> FWIW there are some big changes in gcc/tree-vect-slp.c:vectorizable_load
>>> that looks like unrelated whitespace changes, e.g. the following (and
>>> there are some followup hunks). Did something change underneath, or was
>>> there a stray whitespace cleanup here? (I skimmed through the patch,
>>> and this was the only file I spotted where something looked wrong)
>>
>> yeah, it was a stray whitespace cleanup, but I reverted it.
>>
>> Given the few but only positive comments I've seen I'm planning to
>> commit this over the weekend.
>
> Thanks a lot!
>
> If you are still in a refactoring mood then I have sth else here. When
> streamlining the gimple accessors I noticed the glaring const-correctness
> issue in
>
> /* Return a pointer to the LHS of assignment statement GS. */
>
> static inline tree *
> gimple_assign_lhs_ptr (const gassign *gs)
> {
> return const_cast<tree *> (&gs->op[0]);
> }
>
> and was thinking to either "fix" it by removing the 'const' or by
> merging gimple_assign_lhs and gimple_assign_lhs_ptr into
>
> static inline const tree&
> gimple_assign_lhs (const gassign *);
>
> static inline tree&
> gimple_assign_lhs (gassign *);
AIUI const_tree (like const_rtx) only protects the top-level tree.
This is something I always hoped to change for rtl one day, but fixing
all the fallout would be an incredibly dull task...
I suppose protecting the top level is still better than nothing though.
Thanks,
Richard
