> Which I guess mostly depends on how much mileage we get out of the
> numbering... I rarely have lost sleep over the overhead of looking
> things up in IntMaps.
Thank you!! I found your analysis very helpful. I will stick with
the IntMaps until and unless things reach a stage where they look
really ugly.
> There is no invariant that Cmm control flow is reducible. So we
> can't always rely on this being the case.
Good to know. I would still like to have a simple Haskell example
that generates an irreducible control-flow graph, but for now I can
just write them by hand using .cmm files.
BTW *every* control-flow graph has at least one reverse-postorder
numbering, whether it is reducible or not.
Norman
_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
ghc-devs@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs