On 04/04/2012 09:28 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
btw, I did start my prototyping of this by creating atomic tree codes
for each of the atomic buitins rather than a gimple atomic, but found
that did not integrate very well (I forget exactly what the issue was
now... something to do with when I was trying to translate them from
bultins to treecodes), so I evolved to a gimple statement which gave me
more control over things.
I wasn't excited about creating a new gimple statement, but it seemed
the best solution to my issues. In the end, I think this works very
cleanly. Im certainly open to better solutions. If there is a plan to
change gimple in some way that this doesnt work with, then it would be
good to know what that plan is.
If gimple is going to change somehow that will make this work better,
I'm also fine with doing that. i still have some of that code laying
around. OR I can go back and revisit it to remember exactly what the