"Documentation by paper"

[Joern Rennecke]

> Someone mentioned something that wasn't related to the thread, which is 
> that they thought they read in a paper that a certain algorithm 
> required useless phi nodes.
> I responded that I had provided evidence to contradict this.
> It had nothing to do with documentation per se, actually, it was just 
> dragged back into the documentation thread by someone saying the fact 
> that there is no restriction where nobody would expect one,  should be 
> documented, which is actually a bit silly.

If there is a paper out there that deals with this algorithm -
particularly if it's a paper used to write the implementation and/or 
referenced in the documentation - which states that there is such
a restriction, somebody who has read the paper will expect this restriction,
unless he has read also some other paper / email / comment / etc that
disproves or at least denies that statement.