https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93156
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jan 7 10:05:14 2020
New Revision: 279951
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=279951=gcc=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/93156
* tree-ssa-ccp.c (bit_value_binop): For
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93156
--- Comment #10 from Bruno Haible ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #9)
> So the only thing we should take from the above for the compiler is optimize
> in ccp that x*x has the second least significant bit clear.
If a compiler
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93156
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93156
--- Comment #8 from Bruno Haible ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> a?-1:0 is transformed into -1 before we figure out that a is always true; an
> ordering difference.
Fortunately the GCC optimization affects only the return
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93156
Bruno Haible changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bruno at clisp dot org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93156
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to jim from comment #5)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> > (In reply to jim from comment #3)
> > > Hi Andrew, thank you for the prompt investigation.
> > > I'm probably just being
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93156
--- Comment #5 from jim at meyering dot net ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> (In reply to jim from comment #3)
> > Hi Andrew, thank you for the prompt investigation.
> > I'm probably just being dense, but how can the compiler
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93156
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to jim from comment #3)
> Hi Andrew, thank you for the prompt investigation.
> I'm probably just being dense, but how can the compiler ever generate code
> for that null_ptr function that results
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93156
--- Comment #3 from jim at meyering dot net ---
Hi Andrew, thank you for the prompt investigation.
I'm probably just being dense, but how can the compiler ever generate code for
that null_ptr function that results in -1?
Your comment shows you
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93156
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note the best way to implement null_ptr really (without the need for the
attribute is the following):
/* Return NULL.
Usual compilers are not able to infer something about the return value. */
static
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93156
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
11 matches
Mail list logo
