On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Marc Glisse <marc.gli...@inria.fr> wrote: > On Mon, 18 May 2015, Richard Biener wrote: > >> On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 4:28 PM, Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com> wrote: >>> >>> On 05/14/2015 08:04 AM, Marc Glisse wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, 1 May 2015, Jeff Law wrote: >>>> >>>>> Slight refactoring of the condition by using types_match as suggested >>>>> by Richi. I also applied the new types_match to 2 other patterns in >>>>> match.pd where it seemed clearly appropriate. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I would like to propose this small tweak (regtested ok). If we had a >>>> different type for trees and types, this would be overloading the >>>> function. We already do this in a few places, and I find the resulting >>>> shorter code more readable. >>>> >>>> 2015-05-14 Marc Glisse <marc.gli...@inria.fr> >>>> >>>> * generic-match-head.c (types_match): Handle non-types. >>>> * gimple-match-head.c (types_match): Likewise. >>>> * match.pd: Remove unnecessary TREE_TYPE for types_match. >>> >>> >>> Update the comment for types_match and this is fine. >> >> >> No - it breaks genmatch autodetection of what trees escape. It >> special-cases >> TREE_TYPE (). See capture_info::walk_c_expr: > > > Oh, I didn't know that. > >> /* Give up for C exprs mentioning captures not inside TREE_TYPE (). */ >> unsigned p_depth = 0; >> >> so the patch will pessimize GENERIC folding. >> >> Please do not apply. > > > I think it was already applied. Feel free to revert it, or tell me and I'll > do it next week-end (from your next message I don't really know if it should > be reverted or not).
It's always good to compare generated code (gimple/generic-match.c in the build directory) for such changes. Only the obvious differences should appear. If they do you can leave the patch in. Richard. > -- > Marc Glisse
