[M3devel] m3_build vs. build in parse.c?

[Jay K]

I understand why use m3_build instead of build.
But why ever use build? Just when m3_build has
no chance of optimizing? Or an oversight?
 
 - Jay

________________________________
> From: jay.krell at cornell.edu
> To: hosking at cs.purdue.edu
> CC: m3commit at elegosoft.com
> Subject: RE: [M3commit] m3_build vs. build in parse.c?
> Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 08:46:06 +0000
>
>
> Why not always call m3_build?
>
> Why ever call build?
>
>
>
> - Jay
>
>> From: hosking at cs.purdue.edu
>> Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 02:58:30 -0500
>> To: jay.krell at cornell.edu
>> CC: m3commit at elegosoft.com
>> Subject: Re: [M3commit] m3_build vs. build in parse.c?
>>
>> So that we can avoid having to analyse all the constants ourselves. We can simply generate the trees and then have gcc fold them.
>>
>> On 4 Mar 2010, at 02:16, Jay K wrote:
>>
>>> Why use one vs. the other?
>>> It appears that they are equivalent *except* that m3_build attempts to optimize,
>>> but falls back to build if it can't.
>>>
>>> That is, m3_build calls fold_build.
>>>
>>> - Jay
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>