On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 03:16:33PM +0000, Mark Batty wrote: > Hi Paul, > > Thanks for the document. I'm looking forward to reading the bits about > dependency chains in Linux. And I am looking forward to your thoughts on those bits! > > One point of confusion for me... Example 4 says "language must allow". > > Shouldn't that be "language is permitted to allow"? > > When we say "allow", we mean that the optimised execution should be > allowed by the specification, and Implicitly, the unoptimised > execution should remain allowed too. We want to be concrete about what > the language specification allows, and that's why we say "must". It is > not to disallow the unoptimised execution. OK, got it! Thanx, Paul > > Seems like an > > implementation is always within its rights to avoid an optimization if > > its implementation prevents it from safely detecting the oppportunity > > for that optimization. > > That's right. > > - Mark > > > > Or am I missing something here? > > > > Thanx, Paul > > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
