> How would it? The shrink-wrapping algorithms do not much care how you > write your control flow. The only things I can think of are drastic > things like removing some dead code, or converting a switch to a direct > jump, but those had better be done for the immediately preceding passes > already (register allocation).
But the compiler didn't wait until after shrink-wrapping to emit multiple epilogues and can still do that w/o shrink-wrapping. > I can put back a cleanup_cfg (0) in front if that seems less tricky > (or just safer)? I think you need to evaluate the effects of the change on a set of sources. -- Eric Botcazou
