Re: [C--] bool and bits1

 > it's not possible to allocate temporary variables of bool to
 > simplify complicate predicate/logic expressions to three address
 > forms.

If you are using C--, there is no reason for you to do so --- you
would simply be duplicating the work of the C-- compiler.

If your front end insists on simplifying boolean expressions, than
your front end should compile them as lcc does, to conditional branches.

 > 1. Why there is no bool type in the C-- grammar, but the semantics of 
 > C-- has bool type? allowing bool type would eliminate the above 
 > redundant  type conversions.
 > 
 > 2. I guess most of the use of bits1 is like the above case.  Any 
 > exception?  Why bool and bits1 are not equivalent types?

bits1 is for values and bool is for control flow.
They are handled differently in the back end.



Norman
_______________________________________________
Cminusminus mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.eecs.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/cminusminus