On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 5:40 PM Richard Sandiford
wrote:
>
> process_uses_of_deleted_def seems to have been written on the assumption
> that non-degenerate phis would be explicitly deleted by an insn_change,
> and that the function therefore only needed to delete degenerate phis.
> But that was in
process_uses_of_deleted_def seems to have been written on the assumption
that non-degenerate phis would be explicitly deleted by an insn_change,
and that the function therefore only needed to delete degenerate phis.
But that was inconsistent with the rest of the code, and wouldn't be
very convenien
