Tristan Gingold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > in some cases, a breakpoint can't be set on a continue or break > statement. Here is a simple example:
> The reason is quiet simple: even at -O0 -g, there is no insn (and no > BB) corresponding to the break/continue statement. > Here is a small patch which fixes the issue. > I wonder if this is the right approach. This patch makes the code > generated at -O0 uglier... Thanks for sending the patch. Procedural note: patches should be sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and should have a ChangeLog entry. I don't think it is appropriate to change the meaning of forwarder_block_p. And I'm not sure why you need that patch anyhow, considering the existing code in cleanup_tree_cfg_1. Also you should ideally add a test case. Thanks. Ian
