Ok.

And as you point out it is redundant code rather than dead code, to be
precise.

On Wed, Dec 14, 2022, 1:47 PM Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> > Am 14.12.2022 um 18:28 schrieb G.T. via Gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>:
> >
> > At line 276, lra_assert (spill_class != NO_REGS); would trigger
> > whenever execution reached here with spill_class equal to NO_REGS.
> > Seems to me that would never happen. Because one of the conditions in
> > the if statement right above it (line 265) catches spill_class ==
> > NO_REGS and causes the rest of the for loop to be skipped by executing
> > continue in the consequent of the if. So lra_assert never sees
> > spill_class == NO_REGS. That makes line 276 dead code, right?
>
> Sometimes this serves as documentation to make the code more obvious to
> read.  Depends on the distance of the redundant check.
>
> Richard
>
>
> > Thanks.
> > GT.
>