[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: native compilation units
From: |
Andrea Corallo |
Subject: |
Re: native compilation units |
Date: |
Wed, 08 Jun 2022 06:46:57 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Lynn Winebarger <owinebar@gmail.com> writes:
[...]
> From Andrea's description, this would be the primary "unsafe" aspect of
> intraprocedural optimizations applied to one of
> these aggregated compilation units. That is, that the semantics of
> redefining function symbols would not apply to points
> in the code at which the compiler had made optimizations based on assuming
> the function definitions were constants. It's
> not clear to me whether those points are limited to call sites or not.
Yes, they are limited to the call site.
Andrea
- Re: native compilation units, (continued)
- Re: native compilation units, Stefan Monnier, 2022/06/13
- Re: native compilation units, Lynn Winebarger, 2022/06/14
- Re: native compilation units, Stefan Monnier, 2022/06/15
- Re: native compilation units, Lynn Winebarger, 2022/06/19
- Re: native compilation units, Stefan Monnier, 2022/06/19
- Re: native compilation units, Lynn Winebarger, 2022/06/19
- Re: native compilation units, Lynn Winebarger, 2022/06/20
- Re: native compilation units, Lynn Winebarger, 2022/06/20
- Re: native compilation units, Lynn Winebarger, 2022/06/25
- Re: native compilation units, Lynn Winebarger, 2022/06/26
- Re: native compilation units,
Andrea Corallo <=