On Mon, 13 Aug 2012, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Mon, 13 Aug 2012, Richard Guenther wrote:
If your new predicate would match more places (can you do a quick search?)
You mean: if there are more optimizations that either already check for
double use in the same statement, or could benefit from doing so? I'll take a
look.
I couldn't find anything obvious (not that I understood a significant
percentage of what I saw...).
Note that the comments are efficient since the only current use of
num_imm_uses is in a debug printf call.
I'll give it a few more days for the conversation to settle, so I know
what I should do between:
- the barely modified patch you accepted,
- the check asked by Jakub,
- the restriction to identity that prevents any regression (well...),
- something else?
--
Marc Glisse
