On 04/22/2014 10:13 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-04-21 at 18:45 -0400, Trevor Saunders wrote:
>>> --- a/gcc/tree-loop-distribution.c
>>> +++ b/gcc/tree-loop-distribution.c
>>> @@ -687,8 +687,9 @@ generate_loops_for_partition (struct loop *loop,
>>> partition_t partition,
>>> }
>>> else if (gimple_code (stmt) == GIMPLE_SWITCH)
>>> {
>>> + gimple_switch switch_stmt = stmt->as_a_gimple_switch ();
>>
>> maybe it would make more sense to do
>> else if (gimple_switch switch_stmt = stmt->dyn_cast_gimple_switch ())
>
> Thanks. Yes, or indeed something like:
>
> else if (gimple_switch switch_stmt = dyn_cast <gimple_switch> (stmt))
>
> (modulo the "pointerness" issues mentioned in
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-04/msg01334.html )
>
I'm not keen on embedding assignments into conditionals like this, much less
embedding variable declarations as well. I think David's original is perfect.
r~
