On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 1:44 PM, Martin Jambor <mjam...@suse.cz> wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 01:31:05PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote: >> On Wed, 14 Apr 2010, Diego Novillo wrote: >> >> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 04:40, Richard Guenther <rguent...@suse.de> wrote: >> > >> > > No. make_rename_temp should go away. Please. >> > >> > I don't disagree, in principle (less code is always good). What is >> > wrong with it? >> >> It asks the SSA renamer to put your new variables into SSA form. >> It's very simple to do that manually (at least if no PHIs are >> involved), so better do that. >> > > The problem of using create_tmp_var directly is that the following > pattern is now bound to creep up at quite many places: > > tmp = create_tmp_var (TREE_TYPE (adj->base), "blah"); > if (TREE_CODE (TREE_TYPE (tmp)) == COMPLEX_TYPE > || TREE_CODE (TREE_TYPE (tmp)) == VECTOR_TYPE) > DECL_GIMPLE_REG_P (tmp) = 1; > > Perhaps we should have something like create_gimple_reg_tmp_var that > would do this? If so, I'll be happy to add it.
Yes. I suggest create_tmp_reg as a name for that (simply add a wrapper around create_tmp_var). Richard. > Martin >
