[RFC] SFTs on complex type

[Richard Guenther]

On 12/29/05, Andrew Pinski <pinskia@physics.uc.edu> wrote:
> While looking at PR 25513 and PR 24365, I noticed that we did not have
> SFTs
> on complex type.  This patch implements SFTs on complex types with a
> very
> simple patch.  It "steals" part of Richard Guenther's patch for SFT for
> arrays.
> The part which is required to move away from dependent on SFT are only
> on fields.
>
> Should I split Richard's patch from mine and submit that separate?
>
> The only complex thing in my patch is the patch to var_can_have_subvars
> as we can have both complex types which are gimple registers (which has
> a SSA_NAME associated with it).  If we just say all variables can have
> subvars, we get an ICE in tree-complex.c lowering the arithmetic as we
> don't create a SSA_NAME for those variables even though we should have.

Ah, this is why my patch for this (yes, maybe I should have posted it...) didn't
work ;)

Richard.