This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [tree-ssa] RFC: Making control flow more explicit
> as far as I understand the code, this should fix the problem.
No, this won't, because it won't walk the statics and their initializers.
void (*func_ptr) () * __DTOR_LIST__.107;
long int T.108;
long int T.109;
static void (*func_ptr) () * p = &__DTOR_LIST__ + 4B;
We'll miss the assignment to p.
This is originally why i used walk_tree_without_duplicates in the first