https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102844
--- Comment #28 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #27) > We're not using the backward threader to replace DOM's threader yet. I've > got a TODO to push on Aldy's patch, but haven't been able to get to it over > the last couple weeks. It's an, umm, busy time for us right now. > > There's really only one issue we need to hash out in Aldy's work and there's > a couple proposed workarounds/interm solutions on our way to removing both > the forward threader and DOM itself. And even that patch does not replace the forward threader. It is a hybrid approach using the forward threader, but the ranger path solver (instead of evrp). The forward threader should be with us until ranger can do floats and pointers later this season.
