[lno] copy header and vectorization

[Daniel Berlin]

On Feb 18, 2004, at 1:44 PM, Devang Patel wrote:

>
> On Feb 17, 2004, at 8:32 PM, Daniel Berlin wrote:
>
>> In the meantime, why not clean up the DDG GTY'ing mess, or use loop 
>> versioning somewhere?
>
> Because before completing new implementation or starting to use new 
> features in vectorizer it is important to fix regressions in 
> vectorizer.
Then shouldn't this have been done before committing more code that 
isn't used yet?
Why commit the messy version of the DDG, for example, instead of fixing 
regressions, if you are just going to end up undoing a lot of the DDG 
changes?

I'm all for fixing bugs and regressions, but it seems a bit silly to 
introduce unused code, then leave it sit for weeks while fixing other 
bugs.  It just makes merges harder.

> Right now all tree-ssa-vect tests fail on powerpc-darwin.
>