[Bug bootstrap/84402] [meta] GCC build system: parallelism bottleneck

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84402 --- Comment #32 from Giuliano Belinassi --- (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #31) > I think this came up at Cauldron, but I forget what exactly people said > about it... Actually this PR comes before Cauldron 2019. One way to fix this iss

[Bug tree-optimization/90292] GCC Fails to hoist loop invariant in nested loops

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90292 --- Comment #2 from Giuliano Belinassi --- Just for the sake of completeness, this issue is not addressed by just changing the iterators to 'int'. However, it is in fact solved by changing the iterators to 'unsigned long', 'long', or doing a cast

[Bug tree-optimization/90292] New: GCC Fails to hoist loop invariant in nested loops

Component: tree-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: giuliano.belinassi at usp dot br Target Milestone: --- Both GCC 8.3.0 and 9.0.1 fails to hoist the index calculation for 'i' and 'k' variables of the following function (matrix

[Bug libstdc++/86164] std::regex crashes when matching long lines

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86164 Giuliano Belinassi changed: What|Removed |Added CC||giuliano.belinassi at usp dot br

[Bug bootstrap/84402] [meta] GCC build system: parallelism bottleneck

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84402 --- Comment #29 from Giuliano Belinassi --- > No, the proper fix would be to split the generated files and compile them in > parallel. Similarly for all the insn-*.c generated files. That would the > proper fix. Indeed. However, I am working o

[Bug bootstrap/84402] [meta] GCC build system: parallelism bottleneck

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84402 Giuliano Belinassi changed: What|Removed |Added CC||giuliano.belinassi at usp dot br

[Bug tree-optimization/88186] New: GCC Fails to optimize arithmetic progression

: tree-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: giuliano.belinassi at usp dot br Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 45087 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45087&action=edit Somewhat a test case. GCC fails to optimize

[Bug tree-optimization/86829] Missing sin(atan(x)) and cos(atan(x)) optimizations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86829 --- Comment #5 from Giuliano Belinassi --- I filed the copyright assignment request and sent it to the assign at gnu dot org. The patch itself I sent to the patch e-mail listing with the subject "patch to bug #86829".

[Bug tree-optimization/86829] Missing sin(atan(x)) and cos(atan(x)) optimizations

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86829 --- Comment #3 from Giuliano Belinassi --- (In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #1) > > Do you have a copyright assignment (https://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html) ? No. Sorry, but I think I may need help getting this right. Are there any tips?

[Bug tree-optimization/86829] New: Missing sin(atan(x)) and cos(atan(x)) optimizations

Component: tree-optimization Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: giuliano.belinassi at usp dot br Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 44486 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44486&action=edit add sin(atan(x)) and cos(atan(x)) substi