https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72785
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #9) > Uh, that's a very strict interpretation. In particular, a function parameter > can never satisfy it, whereas many users of bcp rely on inlining turning > parameters into constants. Yeah, it would be certainly very bad if b_c_p stopped returning true in such cases. I believe in the past we had to tweak a couple of optimizations to be more careful about b_c_p (before it is finally folded), e.g. PR49642.
