[?] Trees vs. Tuples for IRs

"Nick Shaffner" <nshaf@intur.net>
13 Sep 1998 22:44:37 -0400

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[?] Trees vs. Tuples for IRs nshaf@intur.net (Nick Shaffner) (1998-09-13)
Re: [?] Trees vs. Tuples for IRs clark@quarry.zk3.dec.com (Chris Clark USG) (1998-09-18)
Re: [?] Trees vs. Tuples for IRs dwight@pentasoft.com (1998-09-18)
Re: [?] Trees vs. Tuples for IRs heinrich@idirect.com (1998-09-19)
Re: [?] Trees vs. Tuples for IRs cliff.click@Eng.Sun.COM (Clifford Click) (1998-09-22)
Re: [?] Trees vs. Tuples for IRs will@ccs.neu.edu (William D Clinger) (1998-09-26)
Re: [?] Trees vs. Tuples for IRs pmk@sgi.com (Peter Klausler) (1998-09-26)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: "Nick Shaffner" <nshaf@intur.net>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 13 Sep 1998 22:44:37 -0400
Organization: Concentric Internet Services
Keywords: optimize, design

Hi,


        What are the pros and cons of using trees versus tuples for a
compiler's intermediete representation? For example, do trees retain
more useful structural information about the source program than
tuples? Are there transforms that can only be applied to trees that
can't be applied to tuples (and vice versa)? Also, having dealt only
with trees in the past, it seems that tuples might be easier to
manipulate - is this generally true?
                                                                                                Cheers,
                                                                                                                Nick
--
Nick Shaffner
Co-Programmer: Duke Nukem Forever
3D Realms
--

Post a followup to this message

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