[llvm] [Transforms] Use a range-based for loop (NFC) (PR #105769)

[via llvm-commits]

llvmbot wrote:


<!--LLVM PR SUMMARY COMMENT-->

@llvm/pr-subscribers-llvm-transforms

Author: Kazu Hirata (kazutakahirata)

<details>
<summary>Changes</summary>



---
Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/105769.diff


1 Files Affected:

- (modified) llvm/lib/Transforms/Scalar/PlaceSafepoints.cpp (+2-5) 


``````````diff
diff --git a/llvm/lib/Transforms/Scalar/PlaceSafepoints.cpp b/llvm/lib/Transforms/Scalar/PlaceSafepoints.cpp
index 77d67a2ce0f380..1f9c3837cc06dc 100644
--- a/llvm/lib/Transforms/Scalar/PlaceSafepoints.cpp
+++ b/llvm/lib/Transforms/Scalar/PlaceSafepoints.cpp
@@ -331,12 +331,9 @@ bool PlaceSafepointsPass::runImpl(Function &F, const TargetLibraryInfo &TLI) {
         // and b) edges to distinct loop headers.  We need to insert pools on
         // each.
         SetVector<BasicBlock *> Headers;
-        for (unsigned i = 0; i < Term->getNumSuccessors(); i++) {
-          BasicBlock *Succ = Term->getSuccessor(i);
-          if (DT.dominates(Succ, Term->getParent())) {
+        for (BasicBlock *Succ : successors(Term->getParent()))
+          if (DT.dominates(Succ, Term->getParent()))
             Headers.insert(Succ);
-          }
-        }
         assert(!Headers.empty() && "poll location is not a loop latch?");
 
         // The split loop structure here is so that we only need to recalculate

``````````

</details>


https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/105769