------- Comment #9 from mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-13 20:08 ------- (In reply to comment #2) > I think it is > a legitimate optimization to replace A**B by A**I (with I=B) when B is known > to > be an integer, hence to accept negative values for A in this case. You can use A**I directly if you want to accept negative values.
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38823
