On Jul 9, 2007, Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> On Jul 9, 2007, Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > Or tell us how you think my patch should be changed. >> >> #define no_new_pseudos (reload_in_progress || reload_completed) >> >> if you want to reword it into a functional macro without a negative, >> then it would take modifying back-ends as well. If so, I guess >> s,no_new_pseudos,can_gen_reg_rtx (),g or can_gen_new_pseudos() would >> do.
> OK, what do you think of this patch? Looks good to me, thanks. > Note that I spent less time writing this patch than I did replying to > the e-mail messages on this thread. Yes, it's frustrating, but my experience has been that getting consensus is generally much more difficult than implementing an agreed-upon solution :-( -- Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/ Red Hat Compiler Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED], gcc.gnu.org} Free Software Evangelist [EMAIL PROTECTED], gnu.org}
