> I think it is. Those called during internal_arg_pointer_based_exp_scan > will see scan_start equal to pc_rtx and won't scan, and for the calls after > it, while scan_start won't be pc_rtx, as it is after scan, it is either > NULL_RTX with no insns in the sequence, or some insn whose NEXT_INSN is > NULL, therefore it will attempt to scan, but won't scan a single insn.
Right, internal_arg_pointer_based_exp_scan will be invoked for nothing. > But surely, if you prefer the explicit argument, I can test that version > too. Yes, I think it is better in the end. :-) -- Eric Botcazou
