On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 7:33 PM, Alexandre Oliva <aol...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Jul 21, 2015, Richard Biener <richard.guent...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Alexandre Oliva <aol...@redhat.com> wrote: >>> + if (cfun->gimple_df) > >> If the cfun->gimple_df check is to decide whether this is a call or a >> function >> then no, this can't work reliably. What is this test for else? > > It turns out it's not call or function, as I thought at first, but > gimplifying or expanding the function. split_complex_args is not used > for calls. So the above might actually work (minus the misleading > comments I wrote), and I think it's cleaner than adding a bool > expanding_p arg to split_complex_args and > assign_parms_augmented_arg_list, called from gimplify_parameters (during > gimplification of a function) and assign_parms (during its expansion). > Do you agree, or would you prefer the explicit argument?
Hmm, ok. Does using if (currently_expanding_to_rtl) work? I think it's slightly more descriptive. Ok with that change. Thanks, Richard. > -- > Alexandre Oliva, freedom fighter http://FSFLA.org/~lxoliva/ > You must be the change you wish to see in the world. -- Gandhi > Be Free! -- http://FSFLA.org/ FSF Latin America board member > Free Software Evangelist|Red Hat Brasil GNU Toolchain Engineer
