> Which I guess mostly depends on how much mileage we get out of the > numbering... I rarely have lost sleep over the overhead of looking > things up in IntMaps.
Thank you!! I found your analysis very helpful. I will stick with the IntMaps until and unless things reach a stage where they look really ugly. > There is no invariant that Cmm control flow is reducible. So we > can't always rely on this being the case. Good to know. I would still like to have a simple Haskell example that generates an irreducible control-flow graph, but for now I can just write them by hand using .cmm files. BTW *every* control-flow graph has at least one reverse-postorder numbering, whether it is reducible or not. Norman _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
