------- Comment #11 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-04 00:18 ------- (In reply to comment #9) > (In reply to comment #8) > > It is a dup of PR 24581. Backporting the gcc/tree-complex.c change > > in revision 147281: > > > > http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revision&revision=147281 > > > > to 4.4 fixes this. > > > If that is the case, then this code is invalid as there are no signed zeros in > Fortran :).
Actually, there are signed zeros in Fortran. One needs to read the Standard to see when the sign is ignored (e.g., with a comparison operator) or behavior near a branch cut (i.e., the ever popular processor dependent behavior). > Let's reopen it until further notice because I think there is something else > going on. I think after that patch we just don't vectorizing the code which > is > what you are seeing. > -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43251
