[tuples] [patch] Fix in_phi in verify_expr

[Richard Guenther]

On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 4:13 PM, Rafael Espindola <espindola@google.com> wrote:
> >  Actually you do not need to walk the tree for t at all.  In fact, PHI arguments
>  >  need to be either SSA_NAMEs or is_gimple_min_invariant ()s.  So
>  >
>  >               /* Addressable variables do have SSA_NAMEs but they
>  >                  are not considered gimple values.  */
>  >
>  >               else if (TREE_CODE (t) != SSA_NAME
>  >                        && TREE_CODE (t) != FUNCTION_DECL
>  >                        && !is_gimple_val (t))
>  >                 {
>  >
>  >  just becomes
>  >
>  >               /* Addressable variables do have SSA_NAMEs but they
>  >                  are not considered gimple values.  */
>  >
>  >               else if (TREE_CODE (t) != SSA_NAME
>  >                        && TREE_CODE (t) != FUNCTION_DECL
>  >                        && !is_gimple_min_invariant (t))
>  >                 {
>  >
>  >  (no idea where this FUNCTION_DECL is for - we should only see addresses
>  >  of functions here?)
>  >
>  >  Adding the SSA_NAME freelist test there is no need to further walk t at all
>  >  (apart from for verify_node_sharing).
>
>  OK. I am going to test the attached patch on trunk.
>
>  It remove the in_phi variable and changes the is_gimple_val to
>  is_gimple_min_invariant.

That's the same patch as the previous one?

Richard.