Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.
| Related articles |
|---|
| Basic blocks and compilers plfriko@yahoo.de (Christian Christmann) (2006-01-07) |
| Re: Basic blocks and compilers gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2006-01-09) |
| Re: Basic blocks and compilers FireMeteor.Guo@gmail.com (FireMeteor.Guo@gmail.com) (2006-01-09) |
| Re: Basic blocks and compilers momchil.velikov@gmail.com (2006-01-09) |
| Re: Basic blocks and compilers DrDiettrich@compuserve.de (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2006-01-09) |
| Re: Basic blocks and compilers bonzini@gnu.org (Paolo Bonzini) (2006-01-09) |
| Re: Basic blocks and compilers kenrose@tfb.com (Ken Rose) (2006-01-09) |
| Re: Basic blocks and compilers stephen.clarke@earthling.net (Stephen Clarke) (2006-01-09) |
| Re: Basic blocks and compilers lars@bearnip.com (2006-01-09) |
| From: | momchil.velikov@gmail.com |
| Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
| Date: | 9 Jan 2006 23:49:21 -0500 |
| Organization: | http://groups.google.com |
| References: | 06-01-009 |
| Keywords: | analysis |
| Posted-Date: | 09 Jan 2006 23:49:21 EST |
Christian Christmann wrote:
> 1) is not spliting basic block .L2 into two blocks where
> the second block just contains the instruction "j .L3".
The lack of label does not imply lack of a basic block. The only way
to enter the basic block, consisting of the single insn ``j .L3'' is a
fallthrough edge, hence no label necessary.
> 2) splits block .L5 and .L4? There are no
> calls to label .L4, so, according to my understanding, all instructions
> of blocks .L5 and .L4 should be held in one block.
And the presense of a label does not imply presense of a basic block.
I suspect the .L4 label is output during code generation for the loop
as a label where ``continue'' statements to jump.
~velco
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.