[PATCH]: RTL iterators

[Richard Henderson]

On Thu, Aug 09, 2001 at 10:06:30PM -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> The reason for this is not because for_each_rtx doesn't exist, since
> it does.  So it must be something else.

Incorrect reasoning.  Most of this code pre-dates for_each_rtx.
When for_each_rtx was added, we did not go back and change all
of the old code.

> This way, you can just say "Give me the next x" where x is something
> you care about.

I can't see how "next" is by itself meaningful in any way.  Most
of the time we need to know whether "X" is read, set, or clobbered.
We also sometimes care about "operands" not "mems" or "regs".


r~