------- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-22
19:54 -------
Subject: Re: missed optimization due with
const function and pulling out of loops
On Sun, 2005-05-22 at 19:36 +0000, rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> ------- Additional Comments From rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-22
> 19:36 -------
> Because do_something does not have to return, therefore
> get_type2 does not necessarily have to be executed.
> In this case we cannot move the call to get_type2 from
> the loop (since do_something could for example initialize
> some table used internally by get_type2).
>
This is wrong.
do_something can't write.
it's const.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21712
