https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71608
Marc Glisse <glisse at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords| |wrong-code
--- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse <glisse at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> Hmm. Doesnt -2 * x overflow?
(-2) * x gives INT_MIN, no overflow there. 2*x does overflow. And we optimize
the first to the second...
