| Message ID | 20110108195011.GB24777@gmx.de |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 8:50 PM, Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf.Wildenhues@gmx.de> wrote: > Tested 'make info pdf html', OK for trunk? Ok. Thanks, Richard. > Thanks, > Ralf > > doc: avoid extra indentation in gimple.texi > > gcc/ChangeLog: > 2011-01-08 Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf.Wildenhues@gmx.de> > > * doc/gimple.texi (Temporaries, Operands, Compound Lvalues) > (Conditional Expressions, Logical Operators) > (Statement and operand traversals): Do not indent smallexample > code. Fix duplicate function argument in example. > > diff --git a/gcc/doc/gimple.texi b/gcc/doc/gimple.texi > index e8cecd7..d20358a 100644 > --- a/gcc/doc/gimple.texi > +++ b/gcc/doc/gimple.texi > @@ -424,8 +424,8 @@ using @code{get_initialized_tmp_var} or @code{create_tmp_var}. > Currently, an expression like @code{a = b + 5} is not reduced any > further. We tried converting it to something like > @smallexample > - T1 = b + 5; > - a = T1; > +T1 = b + 5; > +a = T1; > @end smallexample > but this bloated the representation for minimal benefit. However, a > variable which must live in memory cannot appear in an expression; its > @@ -443,12 +443,12 @@ GIMPLE rvalue (@code{is_gimple_val}), i.e.@: a constant or a register > variable. More complex operands are factored out into temporaries, so > that > @smallexample > - a = b + c + d > +a = b + c + d > @end smallexample > becomes > @smallexample > - T1 = b + c; > - a = T1 + d; > +T1 = b + c; > +a = T1 + d; > @end smallexample > > The same rule holds for arguments to a @code{GIMPLE_CALL}. > @@ -481,8 +481,8 @@ workaround for limitations in later optimizers; if we were to convert this > to > > @smallexample > - T1 = &a.b; > - T1[2] = 42; > +T1 = &a.b; > +T1[2] = 42; > @end smallexample > > alias analysis would not remember that the reference to @code{T1[2]} came > @@ -498,15 +498,15 @@ A C @code{?:} expression is converted into an @code{if} statement with > each branch assigning to the same temporary. So, > > @smallexample > - a = b ? c : d; > +a = b ? c : d; > @end smallexample > becomes > @smallexample > - if (b == 1) > - T1 = c; > - else > - T1 = d; > - a = T1; > +if (b == 1) > + T1 = c; > +else > + T1 = d; > +a = T1; > @end smallexample > > The GIMPLE level if-conversion pass re-introduces @code{?:} > @@ -525,10 +525,10 @@ Except when they appear in the condition operand of a > as follows: @code{a = b && c} becomes > > @smallexample > - T1 = (bool)b; > - if (T1 == true) > - T1 = (bool)c; > - a = T1; > +T1 = (bool)b; > +if (T1 == true) > + T1 = (bool)c; > +a = T1; > @end smallexample > > Note that @code{T1} in this example cannot be an expression temporary, > @@ -2545,7 +2545,7 @@ Additional parameters to @code{walk_tree} must be stored in @code{WI}. For > each operand @code{OP}, @code{walk_tree} is called as: > > @smallexample > - walk_tree (&@code{OP}, @code{CALLBACK_OP}, @code{WI}, @code{WI}- @code{PSET}) > +walk_tree (&@code{OP}, @code{CALLBACK_OP}, @code{WI}, @code{PSET}) > @end smallexample > > If @code{CALLBACK_OP} returns non-@code{NULL} for an operand, the remaining >
diff --git a/gcc/doc/gimple.texi b/gcc/doc/gimple.texi index e8cecd7..d20358a 100644 --- a/gcc/doc/gimple.texi +++ b/gcc/doc/gimple.texi @@ -424,8 +424,8 @@ using @code{get_initialized_tmp_var} or @code{create_tmp_var}. Currently, an expression like @code{a = b + 5} is not reduced any further. We tried converting it to something like @smallexample - T1 = b + 5; - a = T1; +T1 = b + 5; +a = T1; @end smallexample but this bloated the representation for minimal benefit. However, a variable which must live in memory cannot appear in an expression; its @@ -443,12 +443,12 @@ GIMPLE rvalue (@code{is_gimple_val}), i.e.@: a constant or a register variable. More complex operands are factored out into temporaries, so that @smallexample - a = b + c + d +a = b + c + d @end smallexample becomes @smallexample - T1 = b + c; - a = T1 + d; +T1 = b + c; +a = T1 + d; @end smallexample The same rule holds for arguments to a @code{GIMPLE_CALL}. @@ -481,8 +481,8 @@ workaround for limitations in later optimizers; if we were to convert this to @smallexample - T1 = &a.b; - T1[2] = 42; +T1 = &a.b; +T1[2] = 42; @end smallexample alias analysis would not remember that the reference to @code{T1[2]} came @@ -498,15 +498,15 @@ A C @code{?:} expression is converted into an @code{if} statement with each branch assigning to the same temporary. So, @smallexample - a = b ? c : d; +a = b ? c : d; @end smallexample becomes @smallexample - if (b == 1) - T1 = c; - else - T1 = d; - a = T1; +if (b == 1) + T1 = c; +else + T1 = d; +a = T1; @end smallexample The GIMPLE level if-conversion pass re-introduces @code{?:} @@ -525,10 +525,10 @@ Except when they appear in the condition operand of a as follows: @code{a = b && c} becomes @smallexample - T1 = (bool)b; - if (T1 == true) - T1 = (bool)c; - a = T1; +T1 = (bool)b; +if (T1 == true) + T1 = (bool)c; +a = T1; @end smallexample Note that @code{T1} in this example cannot be an expression temporary, @@ -2545,7 +2545,7 @@ Additional parameters to @code{walk_tree} must be stored in @code{WI}. For each operand @code{OP}, @code{walk_tree} is called as: @smallexample - walk_tree (&@code{OP}, @code{CALLBACK_OP}, @code{WI}, @code{WI}- @code{PSET}) +walk_tree (&@code{OP}, @code{CALLBACK_OP}, @code{WI}, @code{PSET}) @end smallexample If @code{CALLBACK_OP} returns non-@code{NULL} for an operand, the remaining