On Wed, 2 Jun 2021 13:59:05 +0200 Richard Biener <richard.guent...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 2, 2021 at 12:47 PM Julian Brown > <jul...@codesourcery.com> wrote: > > > > For historical reasons, it seems that extract_base_bit_offset > > unnecessarily used two different ways to strip > > ARRAY_REF/INDIRECT_REF nodes from component accesses. I verified > > that the two ways of performing the operation gave the same results > > across the whole testsuite (and several additional benchmarks). > > But the two code paths clearly do sth different. The base_ref case > allows (*p)[i] while the !base_ref does not because TREE_CODE (base) > != COMPONENT_REF. > And the !base_ref case for INDIRECT_REF is quite odd, only allowing > *(x.p) where x.p is of REFERENCE_TYPE. > > Whatever this code is supposed to do ... maybe the "prologue" should > be inlined at the two callers instead. Thanks -- I'll go back and look at that bit again. I found it hard to figure out the intention behind these differences, since AFAIK the meaning should be the same -- maybe Jakub could weigh in as the original author of this bit (I believe)? (I figured something like "we can take this shortcut because we know we already did XYZ to this bit" -- this part was originally completely open-coded, i.e. there were two copies of this code, and it's only not open-coded now because I tried to factor out the common bits...) Julian
