Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.compilers > #1600
| From | César <divcesar@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.compilers |
| Subject | IR Representation |
| Date | 2015-09-04 14:39 -0300 |
| Organization | Compilers Central |
| Message-ID | <15-09-005@comp.compilers> (permalink) |
Hi, For learning purpose I am writing a compiler for a small subset of the C language. I intend to implement a few simple optimizations in the IR and also to support at least two target ISAs (x86-64 and some ARM). I would also like to use a tree pattern matching Inst. Selection. However, I am struggling on how to store/represent the IR. Given the above objectives which way to represent the IR would be better? A linear sequence of instructions or a tree? My thoughts on this are as follow: - I believe that a linear sequence of instructions would be easier to optimize/analyze, right? However, a tree seems better given that I want to use a tree pattern matching instruction selection. - I could use a linear representation for optimization and later convert the IR to a tree-like format before instruction selection. However, this conversion seems not so easy... - Currently, I intend to use a single, tree-like, IR since I can extract a linear order from the tree and it suits well the instruction selection algorithm. Besides, I have a question about storing the IR as a tree. Should I (a) create an individual tree for each expression/statement in the source or (b) should I create a single tree concatenating the trees for each expression? - Option (a) seems much simpler to create, but I believe the trees would be very small, possibly degrading the efficiency of the tree pattern matching instruction selection algorithm. [Currently, this is the format that I intend to use.] - I believe option (b) create the opportunity for matching larger patterns and thus could improve performance. But there is a lot of redundant nodes/code in this representation and it also seems harder to implement than option (a). I have read a few books/papers about these things but as you can see I still have a lot of questions. I would really like to hear your comments about the above topics! Thank you, CC)sar.
Back to comp.compilers | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
IR Representation César <divcesar@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 14:39 -0300
Re: IR Representation anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-09-05 16:51 +0000
Re: IR Representation César <divcesar@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 23:05 -0300
Re: IR Representation anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-09-08 07:49 +0000
Re: IR Representation César <divcesar@gmail.com> - 2015-09-11 17:01 -0300
Re: IR Representation Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net> - 2015-09-12 19:45 +0200
Re: IR Representation George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2015-09-08 18:45 -0400
csiph-web