------- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-04 19:05 ------- > Does it buy us anything to make any calls replaceable (i.e. what > would we lose by simply > if (get_call_expr_in (stmt)) > return false; > in is_replaceable_p)?
Before 4.2 when loop.c existed, we would lose the ablity for __builtin_expect working correctly. In 4.2 and above, we "fold" __builtin_expect early on the tree level and place the info on the edges instead. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33619
