a question about const and pure functions.

[Daniel Berlin]

>
>
>> 4) eventually to allow some loops (if they can be proven to be finite)
>> rather than just looking for back edges in the cfg. We have this
>> analysis in the compiler, we should be allowed to use the info here.
>
> This is also good, but seems to clash with your hopes of moving
> pure/const analysis earlier.

The tree-profiling branch (and other branches), will soon have a CFG at 
the cgraph level, so for some definition of "some loops", we could do 
this.

I believe Kenny is assuming this CFG at the cgraph level when he talks 
about doing this.

--Dan