Hi, On Tue, 6 Dec 2011, Tom de Vries wrote:
> what should be the 'next' returned by delete_insn? There are exactly two calls of delete_insn that take the return value. One (delete_insn_and_edges) just uses it to return it itself (and there are no calls to delete_insn_and_edges that use the returned value), the other (delete_insn_chain) wants to have the original next insn (before reordering), even if that means that it can see the insn twice (once as label, once as note, the latter would be skipped). So, return the original next one. Even better would be to somehow clean up the single last use of the return value in delete_insn_chain, and make delete_insn return nothing. Ciao, Michael.
