Steven Bosscher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 04/13/2005 02:10:07 PM:
>
> The problem with your original proposal is that computing
> post-dominance information really is expensive. Depending
> on how often this 50/50 case happens, in a real profile, it
> may or may not be worth the cost do as you suggested. My
> guess is that it doesn't happen very often and it isn't worth
> it. Maybe it is, you'd have to try.
My intuition was that the cost is probably not worth it, which was why I
asked first.
Back to the original problem with the algorithm using edge frequency vs.
block frequency. Would you agree that the correct thing to do is fix the
code so that it uses block frequency, especially since the patch of
Zdenek's you referenced takes care of the original problem I saw when doing
so?
-Pat
