On Oct 18, 2004, at 3:26 PM, Jeffrey A Law wrote:
> It appears that you move the label to the start of the previous
> block, which is probably OK.  I would have moved the label to
> the start of the next block which would probably have been less
> disruptive in terms of the location of the label.  However, given
> the label is not reachable in the flow sense that's probably OK.
>
> Approved.

Thanks.

I also applied the following testcase for PR 16973.

Thanks,
Andrew Pinski