2012/7/24 Steven Bosscher <stevenb....@gmail.com>: > On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Laurynas Biveinis > <laurynas.bivei...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I think it merely points to a bogus GTY annotation, not sure if we want to >>> gobble this kind of gengtype hacks which only benefit -O0 ... >> This one indeed looks redundant, are there others? > > Yes: (...)
Thanks, looking into it. >> I am wondering if >> there is something that would produce an empty loop for GC but not for >> PCH or the other way around. > > You're the one who's supposed to understand all of this best ;-) It takes a long time to swap this back in :) -- Laurynas
