On Mon, 19 Sep 2016, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> > The question is whether such a complex type could be a global tree which I
> > don't think it could.
>
> Specifically, my question was whether for every complex type that is part
> of the global trees, it holds that the complex type's component
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 1:19 PM, Thomas Schwinge
wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 10:18:35 +0200, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Thomas Schwinge
>> wrote:
>> > --- gcc/tree-core.h
>>
Hi!
On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 10:18:35 +0200, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Thomas Schwinge
> wrote:
> > --- gcc/tree-core.h
> > +++ gcc/tree-core.h
> > @@ -553,20 +553,6 @@ enum tree_index {
> >TI_BOOLEAN_FALSE,
> >
Hi!
On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 10:12:48 +0200, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 7:07 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> > On Fri, 16 Sep 2016, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> >
> >> That's what I was afraid of: for example, I can't tell if it holds
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Thomas Schwinge
wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 10:59:16 +0200, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 9:05 AM, Thomas Schwinge
>> wrote:
>> > On Thu, 08 Sep 2016
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 7:07 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Sep 2016, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
>
>> That's what I was afraid of: for example, I can't tell if it holds for
>> all GCC configurations (back ends), that complex types' component types
>> will always match
On Fri, 16 Sep 2016, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> That's what I was afraid of: for example, I can't tell if it holds for
> all GCC configurations (back ends), that complex types' component types
> will always match one of the already existing global trees? (I can
Well, a component type could
On Fri, 16 Sep 2016, Richard Biener wrote:
> Humm ... do we anywhere compare to those global trees by pointer equivalence?
> If so then it breaks LTO support for those types.
The C front end compares main variants to those types for handling usual
arithmetic conversions (and more generally for
Hi!
On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 10:59:16 +0200, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 9:05 AM, Thomas Schwinge
> wrote:
> > On Thu, 08 Sep 2016 13:43:30 +0200, I wrote:
> >> On Wed, 7 Sep 2016 14:23:18 +0200, Richard Biener
> >>
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 9:05 AM, Thomas Schwinge
wrote:
> Hi!
>
> (CCing Bernd and Jakub -- for your information, or: "amusement" -- as
> you've discussed offloading preload_common_nodes issues before...)
>
> Got to look into this some more, yesterday:
>
> On Thu, 08 Sep
Hi!
(CCing Bernd and Jakub -- for your information, or: "amusement" -- as
you've discussed offloading preload_common_nodes issues before...)
Got to look into this some more, yesterday:
On Thu, 08 Sep 2016 13:43:30 +0200, I wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Sep 2016 14:23:18 +0200, Richard Biener
>
11 matches
Mail list logo