------- Comment #12 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-15 09:02 ------- Why do you think refering to other debug stmts decl is not a good idea? I was thinking of simplifying propagation into debug stmts by simply replacing all uses of a to-become dead SSA name with a non-artificial decl with its underlying declaration. So,
i_1 = j_2 + k_3; # DEBUG i <= i_1 # DEBUG foo <= i_1 + 1 on removing i_1 becomes # DEBUG i <= j_1 + k_3 # DEBUG foo <= i + 1 based on the fact that we better had a debug stmt for i already. In fact I can't see how this is different from what you propose. And in fact your proposal effectively would do # DEBUG tmp0 <= j_1 + k_3 # DEBUG i <= tmp0 # DEBUG foo <= tmp0 + 1 effectively adding a new debug stmt for each regular stmt you remove. I don't think that's going to fly. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot | |org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41343