On 8/8/19 11:06 AM, Arvind Sankar wrote: > On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 08:31:28AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote: >> True, but they could be. When David was working in this space a few >> years ago I concluded that the main value in sub-classing the various >> RTL operators just wansn't worth the effort. Instead we focused on >> starting to tear apart things like the toplevel objects into rtx_insn >> and the like. THere's little value in treating those as simple RTXs. >> INSN_LIST and the like were also ripe for this treatment. >> >> The biggest value in making a real class for the operators things would >> be to move the runtime RTL checking into a compile-time check. But I >> couldn't really green light something like that without first completing >> the rtx_insn changes. > > Are there any notes or old discussion threads on what remains? I would > be interested in taking a look if no-one else is. I don't recall if that discussion was internal or external. If the latter, then it'd be in the gcc-patches archives.
Jeff
