On Saturday 12 November 2005 16:11, Per Bothner wrote: > I'm clearly not explaining myself ... > Well, it doesn't help that I'm not really good at language stuff, so don't worry and thanks for putting up with the silly questions.
> However, ideally the compiler should realize that x actually has > the more specific type 'int __attribute__((never_null)) *', and > should use that information to generate better code. It seems > this should be straightforward using SSA, as I sketched in my > previous message. > Aha, yes, that's fine then. I'll defer the decision of type vs function attribute to you folks. However you end up marking it, that will only mean a couple line change in VRP.
