[PATCH] [C++11] Add predecessors(BasicBlock *) / successors(BasicBlock *) iterator ranges.

[Manuel Jacob]

================
Comment at: lib/Analysis/BranchProbabilityInfo.cpp:533
@@ -532,4 +532,3 @@
        BI != BE; ++BI) {
-    for (succ_const_iterator SI = succ_begin(BI), SE = succ_end(BI);
-         SI != SE; ++SI) {
-      printEdgeProbability(OS << "  ", BI, *SI);
+    for (const BasicBlock *Succ : successors(BI)) {
+      printEdgeProbability(OS << "  ", BI, Succ);
----------------
David Blaikie wrote:
> David Blaikie wrote:
> > You could drop the {} from this loop (and the outer loop, actually... ), but I don't think it's necessary in this cleanup (and may even be better as a separate commit anyway)
> I think we've been pretty forward about using "auto" more aggressively - especially in "obvious" cases, which I think this qualifies (BI might one day be "BB" when that outer loop is changed to a range-based-for, but either name connotes "basic block" pretty pervasively in LLVM - and iterating over the predecessors or successors of a basic block clearly consists of more basic blocks).
> 
> So maybe these should be "auto *" and "const auto *" throughout the refactoring.
Yes, I'll do these changes (rangify outer loop, remove braces) after committing this one.

I'm not sure if it's better to use "auto" here -- it doesn't increase readability. I don't think "BasicBlock" is a very cumbersome name. "Succ" is a general name that could also mean "successor instruction" for example.

http://reviews.llvm.org/D4481