Re: Why do intermediate codes have >, >=?

Chris Fraser <cwf@research.bell-labs.com>
21 Jun 1996 17:07:41 -0400

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
Why do intermediate codes have >, >=? alan@ez2.ezlink.com (1996-05-21)
Re: Why do intermediate codes have >, >=? mark@omnifest.uwm.edu (1996-05-25)
Re: Why do intermediate codes have >, >=? henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) (1996-06-13)
Re: Why do intermediate codes have >, >=? cwf@research.bell-labs.com (Chris Fraser) (1996-06-21)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: Chris Fraser <cwf@research.bell-labs.com>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 21 Jun 1996 17:07:41 -0400
Organization: Compilers Central
Keywords: design

Dave might remember something that I've forgotten, but I think lcc has those
extra codes mainly because I instinctively avoid asymmetry, but that's a
poor rationale. I'd be hard-pressed to refute Alan's point.


Henry's note about side effects can't explain lcc's redundant intermediate
codes, because lcc's front end moves side effects into separate trees or
dags before generating the IR.


--

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.