Segher Boessenkool <segher at gcc dot> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2019-04-22
                 CC|                            |segher at gcc dot
           See Also|                            |
                   |                            |a/show_bug.cgi?id=90070,
                   |                            |
                   |                            |a/show_bug.cgi?id=22326
         Resolution|INVALID                     |---
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #9 from Segher Boessenkool <segher at gcc dot> ---
We currently only do it for trivial cases, as the example in comment 6 shows
as well.  This is done during expand, which is the wrong place for it.

PR90070 is asking for better optimisation of this: do the operation in single
precision, and use single-precision constants, if this does not change the
result (or there is some -ffast-math option).

PR22326 is also closely related.  I don't think we can close any of these PRs
as a dup of another, they are all asking for slightly different things :-)

Reply via email to