|[4 earlier articles]|
|Re: SSA without phi cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com (Chris F Clark) (2007-04-23)|
|Re: SSA without phi email@example.com (Matthias Blume) (2007-04-26)|
|Re: SSA without phi Nicolas.Capens@gmail.com (2007-04-29)|
|Re: SSA without phi firstname.lastname@example.org (Tommy Thorn) (2007-05-04)|
|Re: SSA without phi email@example.com (2007-05-04)|
|Re: SSA without phi firstname.lastname@example.org (Inderaj Bains) (2007-05-07)|
|Re: SSA without phi email@example.com (Tommy Thorn) (2007-05-08)|
|Re: SSA without phi Nicolas.Capens@gmail.com (2007-05-22)|
|From:||Tommy Thorn <firstname.lastname@example.org>|
|Date:||8 May 2007 17:45:15 -0700|
|References:||07-04-07507-04-152 07-05-004 07-05-027|
On May 7, 1:44 pm, "Inderaj Bains" <inde...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That is incorrect. Leaving SSA does not require register allocation,
> renaming plus color-out can guarantee dropping remaining names is
That is the same as register allocation for an unbounded set of
registers. I'm not sure why you mean by "color-out", but you'd have to
track liveness and conflicts to accomplish the renaming at which point
you're very close to a full allocator.
My main point was that just dropping the subscripts doesn't work.
> Also retaining some names can be very useful for a production
> compiler for debugging purposes
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.