Robin Dapp <rdapp....@gmail.com> writes: >> Looks reasonable overall. The new match patterns are 1:1 the >> same as the COND_ ones. That's a bit awkward, but I don't see >> a good way to "macroize" stuff further there. Can you at least >> interleave the COND_LEN_* ones with the other ones instead of >> putting them all at the end? > > Yes, no problem. It's supposed to be only temporary anyway (FWIW) > as I didn't manage with the "stripping _LEN" way on the first few tries. > Still on the todo list but unlikely to be done before stage 1 closes. > > I believe Richard "kind of" LGTM'ed the rest minus the spurious > pattern (which is gone now) but there is still the direct optab change > that he didn't comment on so I think we should wait for his remarks > still.
Could you explain why a special expansion is needed? (Sorry if you already have and I missed it, bit overloaded ATM.) What does it do that is different from what expand_fn_using_insn would do? Thanks, Richard
