On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 3:11 PM, Steven Bosscher <stevenb....@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 12:04 AM, Steven Bosscher <stevenb....@gmail.com> > wrote: >> Hello, >> >> This is another step towards moving GIMPLE_SWITCH expansion to an >> earlier point in the pipeline. >> >> With the attached patch, some of the logic from stmt.c:add_case_node() >> is moved to gimplify.c:gimplify_switch_expr(). This includes: >> >> * Code to drop case labels that are out of range for the switch index >> expression. (Actually, I suspect this code hasn't worked properly >> since gimplification was introduced, because the switch index >> expression can be promoted by language specific gimplification, so >> expand_case never actually sees the proper type with the current >> implementation in stmt.c.) >> >> * Code to fold_convert case label values to the right type. I've opted >> to go for folding to the original type of the SWITCH_EXPR, rather than >> to the post-gimplification switch index type. >> >> * Code to canonicalize CASE_LABEL's subnodes, CASE_LOW and CASE_HIGH. >> I've chosen to impose strict requirements that CASE_HIGH > CASE_LOW if >> CASE_HIGH is non-zero. This is different from what add_case_node does, >> but I think it makes sense to go for the minimal representation here: >> The case labels in stmt.c never lived very long (only during expand) >> but GIMPLE_SWITCH statements stay around for much of the compilation >> process and can also be streamed out, etc. >> >> Bootstrapped and tested on powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu. OK for trunk? >> >> Ciao! >> Steven > > And this time with the right subject and the right patch attached. > Sorry for the inconvenience!
This caused: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53153 -- H.J.
