http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
--- Comment #37 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> 2011-07-25 11:44:12 UTC --- On Mon, 25 Jul 2011, paolo.carlini at oracle dot com wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813 > > --- Comment #35 from Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> > 2011-07-25 11:41:57 UTC --- > Also, something seems wrong with nextafter, but for the intrinsic too this > time, thus maybe is a middle-end issue (eg, not optimized at all?). Try: > > constexpr float na = __builtin_nextafter(0.0f, 0.0f); Not all functions are folded by the middle-end. Look into builtins.c. Patches welcome.
