http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56202
--- Comment #11 from Manuel López-Ibáñez <manu at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-02-04 19:00:22 UTC --- (In reply to comment #10) > (In reply to comment #9) > > You are right, but then I don't understand why we should compute __e > > *before* > > checking __t == __x, per your first patch (I think I managed to confuse > > myself > > Indeed. Actually, the way I quoted the paragraph is unfortunate. I just want to say, that you are right and we should compute __e *before* checking __t == __x. I didn't realise this earlier and that probably helped to confuse things.
