On 10/12/2016 01:08 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, 7 Oct 2016, Richard Biener wrote:
This turns the switch (which also requires propagating into ASSERT_EXPRs,
otherwise those will end up with released SSA names eventually).
A [3/2] would be to let ASSERT_EXPRs be removed by the propagator
On Fri, 7 Oct 2016, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> This turns the switch (which also requires propagating into ASSERT_EXPRs,
> otherwise those will end up with released SSA names eventually).
>
> A [3/2] would be to let ASSERT_EXPRs be removed by the propagator
> which would a) require VRP to fix up