This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: bug in dominance algorithm
On Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 07:59:10AM +0200, Michael Matz wrote:
> Nevertheless note, that we _never_ get this any better for blocks without
> _any_ successors. For those postdoms really have no sane meaning ...
Well, to me it seems more sane to say that there is no block that
post-dominates them, as opposed to the current situation observed
by Jan that all blocks with no successors post-dominate all other
blocks with no successors.
> but nodes without successors are the roots of there trees,
> and tree-roots have no dominator).
My point exactly.
r~