Hi Andrew,
Thanks for looking into it and my apologies for not being clear.
My proposal was to use value ranges when expanding gimple to RTL and
eliminate redundant zero/sign extensions. I.e., if we know the value
generated by some gimple operation is already in the (zero/sign)
extended from base
On 6/19/19 11:04 PM, Kugan Vivekanandarajah wrote:
Hi Andrew,
Thanks for working on this.
Enable elimination of zext/sext with VRP patch had to be reverted in
(https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-09/msg00672.html) due to the
need for value ranges in PROMOTED_MODE precision for at least 1 te
Hi Andrew,
Thanks for working on this.
Enable elimination of zext/sext with VRP patch had to be reverted in
(https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-09/msg00672.html) due to the
need for value ranges in PROMOTED_MODE precision for at least 1 test
case for alpha.
Playing with ranger suggest that
Now that stage 1 has reopened, I’d like to reopen a discussion about the
technology and experiences we have from the Ranger project I brought up
last year. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2018-05/msg00288.html . (The
original wiki pages are now out of date, and I will work on updating
them soon.)
