Re: About standard_iv_increment_position

[Zdenek Dvorak <rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz>]

Hello,

> > > The second remark is that standard_iv_increment_position will return a
> > > block_stmt_iterator and a position that is invalid for verify_flow_info, 
> > > as shown in the following case that fails:
> > > 
> > >       if (_n_413 < N_60) goto <L5>; else goto <L23>;
> > >       ivtmp.1076_499 = ivtmp.1076_498 + 1;
> > 
> > I don't think this can ever happen.  
> 
> This occured during a bootstrap of gcc in autovect branch.

then there is something fishy somewhere.  Perhaps this invariant is
restored later, but I don't see any reason for violating it in the first
place.

Zdenek