| To: | Peng Zhao <pengzhao@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, David Stephenson <dlstephe@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: multi-entry CFG |
| From: | Shin-Ming Liu <shinmingliu@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 28 Aug 2001 09:24:48 -0700 (PDT) |
| Cc: | sgi <pro64-support@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.LNX.4.21.0108262200410.28336-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | owner-pro64-support@xxxxxxxxxxx |
--- Peng Zhao <pengzhao@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > 2. Is there any special reason to left the > "dangling" entry there? The existence of dangling block is the consequence of funny code as David has pointed out. Either you avoid generating it or clean up in a separate pass. We have chosen the latter by utilizing DCE. It appeared to be the most cost effective solution at that time. Does the dangling block give you extra headache? __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger http://phonecard.yahoo.com/ |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: multi-entry CFG, David Stephenson |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: multi-entry CFG, Peng Zhao |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: multi-entry CFG, David Stephenson |
| Next by Thread: | Re: multi-entry CFG, Peng Zhao |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |