Inlining, nested functions, and VLAs

[Richard Kenner]

    > It seems to me that the right way to inline this is to make a copy of Q
    > remapping it's argument types with respect to F, but I don't think that
    > makes sense.

    Why not?  We remap all the other types during inlining; why 
    shouldn't this apply to the parameters as well?

Because I'm not talking about the parameters of the function being inlined
when it's being copied, but the parameters of a nested function *within*
the function being inlined.  So we'd have multiple copies of that (uninlined
so far) function around, corresponding to the original version and the
version as to be used in each instance where the outer function is inlined;
it means we'd have to copy the entire functio, basically, in order to
change the type of the parameters.