------- Comment #11 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-09-22 15:59 -------
The reason why the return stmt, at least after lowering, doesn't have a
location, is because after lowering there is just one return instead of
possibly multiple returns from before lowering.  So the location_t of the
individual returns is preserved on the gimple assignments to the RESULT_DECL.

What I just find strange is why is the return stmt involved in the SRA
optimization (except as unrelated stmt following the deleted stmt).  There was
an assignment to RESULT_DECL before that, it had the intended locus of the
return from the source, and I'd say that the replacements are connected to that
statements if the RESULT_DECL can't be scalarized.



Reply via email to