search for: 779a6dce

...ically reachable, so it's safe to add undef there. > So what's to become of llvm.lifetime.start/end? Are they going to be removed or fixed? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20141203/779a6dce/attachment.html>

If we added unwind target to every potentially throwing instruction (loads, stores, all binary operations), wouldn't all such instructions have to become BB terminators? I'd expect that CFG would then end up consisting mostly of single-instruction BBs. This can't be good for compilation performance and optimizations... Another vague idea: what if lifetime.start() returned some kind