Hi,
On Wed, 20 Nov 2013, Jeff Law wrote:
> > There are three places the patch doesn't touch:
> >
> > (A) cfgbuild.c (make_edges) has this comment:
> >/* By nature of the way these get numbered, ENTRY_BLOCK_PTR->next_bb
> > block
> > is always the entry. */
> > where the meaning wasn't
On Wed, 2013-11-20 at 11:28 -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 11/20/13 10:03, David Malcolm wrote:
[...]
> > There are three places the patch doesn't touch:
> >
> > (A) cfgbuild.c (make_edges) has this comment:
> >/* By nature of the way these get numbered, ENTRY_BLOCK_PTR->next_bb
> > block
> >
On 11/20/13 10:03, David Malcolm wrote:
I went through the comment lines, rewording the ones where the meaning
was obvious to me. Attached is a patch that does so; successfully
compiled stage1; OK for trunk? (these are just changes to comments, so
not sure a full bootstrap is necessary).
Yea, i
On Wed, 2013-11-20 at 11:07 +0100, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-11-20 10:08:45 +0100, Steven Bosscher
> wrote:
> [...]
> > I wonder if there are any more cases like this missed... Could you
> > please check that? Something like:
> >
> > egrep -w "ENTRY_BLOCK_PTR|EXIT_BLOCK_PTR" gcc/*.
