https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42108
--- Comment #66 from Salvatore Filippone ---
As far as I remember(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #65)
> On Wed, 10 Dec 2014, burnus at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > Fortran 66 compilers did. For instance, "DO i = 2, 1" would then be e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42108
--- Comment #65 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 10 Dec 2014, burnus at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42108
>
> --- Comment #64 from Tobias Burnus ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42108
--- Comment #64 from Tobias Burnus ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #63)
> Unfortunately for the testcase this doesn't allow moving the division at all
> and we are lucky that we have range information at all because of the fortran
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42108
--- Comment #63 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 34239
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34239&action=edit
LIM patch
This is a patch to loop invariant motion I was playing with to use range
information to move a stmt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42108
--- Comment #62 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 34238
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34238&action=edit
frontend patch
So the issue is that the division is executed conditionally because it is
placed
after the loo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42108
--- Comment #61 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #60)
> Ok, so I have a patch that teaches LIM to move the division by using the
> value-range information we now store.
Which can't be done this way ... (the value-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42108
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
