Re: [patch] replace a bunch of equivalent checks for asm operands with a new function

Hmm, what do you have in mind for such a situation? If extract_asm_operands returns NULL then asm_noperands will return -1. If extract_asm_operands returns non-NULL then asm_noperands deep-dives the PATTERN of the insn (just like extract_asm_operands) and returns = 0 unless the insn is

[patch] replace a bunch of equivalent checks for asm operands with a new function

Hello, This idiom: if (GET_CODE (body) == ASM_INPUT || asm_noperands (body) = 0) appears in multiple places. There's even one place where the idiom above is used in reverse (making the GET_CODE... check redundant). A few more places to the equivalent by checking extract_asm_operands != NULL. It

Re: [patch] replace a bunch of equivalent checks for asm operands with a new function

This idiom: if (GET_CODE (body) == ASM_INPUT || asm_noperands (body) = 0) appears in multiple places. There's even one place where the idiom above is used in reverse (making the GET_CODE... check redundant). A few more places to the equivalent by checking extract_asm_operands != NULL. I

Re: [patch] replace a bunch of equivalent checks for asm operands with a new function

On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: This idiom: if (GET_CODE (body) == ASM_INPUT || asm_noperands (body) = 0) appears in multiple places. There's even one place where the idiom above is used in reverse (making the GET_CODE... check redundant). A few more places to the