Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

allow dead code to not have an immediate dominator #1982

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

0xalpharush
Copy link
Contributor

The example in the issue highlights that the expression i++ will cause issues since it is dead code and thus does not have any dominating nodes

closes #1973

@@ -95,5 +95,4 @@ def compute_dominance_frontier(nodes: List["Node"]) -> None:
runner.dominance_frontier = runner.dominance_frontier.union({node})
while runner != node.immediate_dominator:
runner.dominance_frontier = runner.dominance_frontier.union({node})
assert runner.immediate_dominator
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

For the sake of the type annotation, should we do a break if the immediate dominator is none?

This will also allow us to add a code comment regarding the dead code

@0xalpharush 0xalpharush marked this pull request as draft June 22, 2023 17:37
@0xalpharush 0xalpharush deleted the fix/remove-invalid-assertion branch August 19, 2023 20:13
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants