On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 2:40 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Nov 2016, Bin Cheng wrote:
>
> +(for cmp (lt le gt ge)
> + (simplify
> + (cond (cmp@0 (convert1? @1) INTEGER_CST@3) (convert2? @1) INTEGER_CST@2)
> + (with
> + {
> + tree from_type = TREE_TYPE (@1);
> +
On Fri, 18 Nov 2016, Bin Cheng wrote:
+(for cmp (lt le gt ge)
+ (simplify
+ (cond (cmp@0 (convert1? @1) INTEGER_CST@3) (convert2? @1) INTEGER_CST@2)
+ (with
+ {
+ tree from_type = TREE_TYPE (@1);
+ tree c1_type = TREE_TYPE (@3), c2_type = TREE_TYPE (@2);
+ enum tree_code code =
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 5:53 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
> Hi,
> This is a follow up patch for
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg01898.html
> It moves remaining simplification for (A == C1) ? A : C2 in
> fold_cond_expr_with_comparison
> to match.pd. Bootstrap and test
Hi,
This is a follow up patch for
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg01898.html
It moves remaining simplification for (A == C1) ? A : C2 in
fold_cond_expr_with_comparison
to match.pd. Bootstrap and test on x86_64 and AArch64, is it OK?
Thanks,
bin
2016-11-17 Bin Cheng