http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54458
--- Comment #8 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-04
09:29:02 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Sep 4 09:28:58 2012
New Revision: 190918
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=190918
Log:
2012-09-04 Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54458
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54458
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54458
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-03
09:06:29 UTC ---
Cleaned up testcase (and no longer invalid):
unsigned int a, b, c;
void
foo (unsigned int x)
{
do
{
if (a == 0 ? 1 : 1 % a)
for (; b; b--)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54458
--- Comment #7 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-03
14:27:27 UTC ---
I'm testing
Index: gcc/tree-ssa-threadupdate.c
===
--- gcc/tree-ssa-threadupdate.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54458
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54458
--- Comment #4 from Francesco Zappa Nardelli francesco.zappa.nardelli at gmail
dot com 2012-09-02 17:55:10 UTC ---
Just to be precise, the program has an undefined behaviour in the test of the
first 'if':
(c ? 0 : 0 % 0)
because the right
