[PATCH] D74989: [LoopTerminology] Loop Simplify Form

[Michael Kruse via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

Meinersbur accepted this revision.
Meinersbur added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.

@fhahn Also asked to cross-link https://llvm.org/docs/Passes.html#loop-simplify-canonicalize-natural-loops. Could you please do so?



================
Comment at: llvm/docs/LoopTerminology.rst:156
+* A single backedge (which implies that there is a single latch).
+* Dedicated exits. That is, no exit block for the loop
+  has a predecessor that is outside the loop. This implies
----------------
baziotis wrote:
> "no exit block for the loop"
> I took this from the video but I think it syntactically incorrect, right? I feel like it should be "of the loop".
As a non-native speaker, both seem to be fine. A block can play a role //for// a loop (here: being an exit block). 


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D74989/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D74989