On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 03:00:49PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> Doesn't the code in update_accumulator_with_ops need the same
> change?
No, the difference is that it uses false as the next to last argument,
i.e. inserts after gsi, in which case GSI_CONTINUE_LINKING is desirable,
so that the stmt is inserted after that.
> Unrelated, but the block comment still refers to UPDATE,
> which is no longer a parameter.
Adjusted.
>
> I see similar looking code in tree-inline.c::copy_bb... Does it
> need updating as well?
That is again false, GSI_CONTINUE_LINKING pair, i.e. insert after and update
gsi to point after the added stmts.
Jakub
