https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85599
--- Comment #19 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #17)
> Then you are only interest in the special case of .and.
>
> binop above is the entire collection of all binary
> operators (e.g., +,-,*,/ etc as well a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85599
--- Comment #18 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
This PR is now about a missed optimization in the middle-end.
Would it possible to move further discussions to pr57160? TIA.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85599
--- Comment #17 from Steve Kargl ---
On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 08:41:42AM +, janus at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > and implement it to transform
> > result = op1 binop op2
> >
> > into
> >
> > tmp1 = op1
> > tmp2 = op2
> > result = tmp1 BINO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85599
--- Comment #16 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #15)
> To be clear.
First of all, I'd have preferred to have a Fortran standard which gives clear
and precise instructions on how a compiler should handle cas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85599
--- Comment #15 from Steve Kargl ---
On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:25:59AM +, janus at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> --- Comment #14 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #10)
> > Am I mistaken to read
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85599
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85599
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Component|fortran
