------- Comment #9 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-08 16:01 ------- I assumed it is special vtable handling (that likely doesn't cause the addressable flag to be set?) - I simply stopped debugging at the point where I noticed the node gets removed even though there are still indirect calls that possibly can reach it.
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42110
