From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7943 invoked by alias); 31 May 2009 12:15:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 7700 invoked by uid 48); 31 May 2009 12:14:59 -0000 Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 12:15:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20090531121459.7699.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/39129] The meaning of 'BB' in "too many BBs in loop" In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2009-05/txt/msg02379.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-31 12:14 ------- Definitely spelling out basic-block is an improvement. Though it would be nice to use 'control-flow' when appropriate, if we can exclude the non-empty latch case from this. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39129