https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85237
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Note if the code was written as:
```
int f(int x)
{
int t = (10000 * (x == 1));
return 100 >> t;
}
```
We do change `100 >> t` to just `100` (starting in GCC 13).
What is happening in the original testcase is in the fold we are first
converting `(10000 * (x == 1))` into `x == 1 ? 10000 : 0` and then `100 >>
(10000 * (x == 1))` (and `100 >> (x == 1 ? 10000 : 0)` into `x == 1 ? (100 >>
10000) : (100 >> 0)` and that gets converted into just `x == 1 ? 0 : 100`.
Maybe this is premature optimization these days.
