> Yeah, I thought testing for a PARM_DECL should be sufficient? For > nested functions references to outer parms should have been lowered via the > static chain at the point tree-inline.c sees them.
OK for the latter point, but are you sure for the former? My understanding is that we're already in SSA form, so parameters can be represented by SSA_NAMEs without defining statements. -- Eric Botcazou
