On 03/23/2011 02:40 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> I can look into just how many places might need to be fixed up because
> of this, but scattering a bunch of ifs all over the place seemed less
> elegant than handling it all in the emit* functions.
Yeah, maybe. On the other hand, the other complicatio
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 01:55:34PM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> I can't see how emitting a NULL_RTX should be a Good Thing, ever,
> and thus I don't see why we should be doing special things to
> handle it.
Ah, I thought the same thing and gcc_assert'ed emitting a NULL_RTX. I
didn't get ver
On 03/23/2011 01:17 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> * emit-rtl.c (emit_pattern_after_setloc): New function.
> (emit_insn_after_setloc, emit_jump_insn_after_setloc): Call it.
> (emit_call_insn_after_setloc, emit_debug_insn_after_setloc): Likewise.
> (emit_pattern_after): New functi
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 11:36:26AM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 03/23/2011 05:09 AM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> > Did you mean loc == UNKNOWN_LOCATION? Also, it looks like that's
> > conflating INSN_LOCATORs and location_ts; it seems like it'd be better
> > to keep them separate.
>
> Ug. Yes
On 03/23/2011 05:09 AM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> Did you mean loc == UNKNOWN_LOCATION? Also, it looks like that's
> conflating INSN_LOCATORs and location_ts; it seems like it'd be better
> to keep them separate.
Ug. Yes and yes. I'd forgotten that insn_locators are different
from line locations.
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 05:06:39PM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 03/22/2011 04:13 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> > rtx
> > emit_call_insn_before_setloc (rtx pattern, rtx before, int loc)
> > {
> > ...
> > if (pattern == NULL_RTX)
> > return last;
> >
> > first = NEXT_INSN (first);
> >
On 03/22/2011 04:13 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> rtx
> emit_call_insn_before_setloc (rtx pattern, rtx before, int loc)
> {
> ...
> if (pattern == NULL_RTX)
> return last;
>
> first = NEXT_INSN (first);
>
> The jump_insn and debug_insn variants have identical behavior to
> call_insn.
AFAIC
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 02:28:30PM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 03/21/2011 08:18 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> > +/* Insert PATTERN before BEFORE, setting its INSN_LOCATION to LOC.
> > + MAKE_RAW indicates how to turn PATTERN into a real insn. INSNP
> > + indicates if PATTERN is meant for
On 03/21/2011 08:18 PM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> +/* Insert PATTERN before BEFORE, setting its INSN_LOCATION to LOC.
> + MAKE_RAW indicates how to turn PATTERN into a real insn. INSNP
> + indicates if PATTERN is meant for an INSN as opposed to a JUMP_INSN,
> + CALL_INSN, etc. */
> +
> +static
This patch builds on the previous one to refactor the close cousins of
the *_noloc family. I attempted to separate these out into separate
patches, one dealing with *_setloc and the other dealing with the
remainder, but I did not trust myself to do it correctly even with
magit's help.
* e
10 matches
Mail list logo
