[patch] tree-cfg.c: Speed up cleanup_tree_cfg().

[Giovanni Bajo]

Diego Novillo wrote:

> My concern is, actually, new code.  I was also under the impression
> that gcc_assert was a nop in released compilers.  We should have a
> bigger warning sign.

I thought this was explained in details by Nathan, in both documentation and
mails.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-08/msg02264.html

Remember that keeping asserts in release builds can save people from many
silent codegen bugs.

> I guess that a rule of thumb could be "no function calls in gcc_assert
> without ENABLE_CHECKING guards".

Maybe. I kept some RTL-level predicate call if it looked to me lightweight
enough. Nathan also told me that he was going to double-check/refine the
performances of asserts when 4.0 branches.

> I hope this is documented?

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-08/msg02239.html

Giovanni Bajo