http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58574
--- Comment #6 from Andreas Krebbel <krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4) > Created attachment 30935 [details] > Alternate fix > > Another possibility. If the check is there really just to prevent handling > tablejumps, I wonder why we can't do the tablejump handling first and only > if it didn't do anything, handle all other jumps. I agree with that patch. Since tablejump_p is available it is easier to read the other way around. Thanks!
