--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
07:37 ---
In principle this is fixed. Of course we either need a tree-combiner or
forwprop on steroids to catch all cases. Which would make this bug a duplicate.
Closed Fixed.
--
What|Removed
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
07:35 ---
Subject: Bug 22486
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-07-26 07:34:58
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog fold-const.c
gcc/t
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-15
09:39 ---
Patch ready. The C++ testcase presented here needs the tree-combiner to do
the folding though.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22486
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-14
16:58 ---
I'm looking at this myself and have a patch that helps for the cases I care.
--
What|Removed |Added
--
--
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22486
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-14
13:26 ---
Or even simple C:
typedef struct { int i; } Foo;
Foo foo;
Foo *bar(void) { return (Foo *)&foo.i; }
here, in bar() fold (or whoever) should fold (Foo *)&foo.i to &foo.
Because i is at offset zero and foo is
