--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-12 08:42 ---
Subject: Bug 26198
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Oct 12 08:42:13 2007
New Revision: 129256
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129256
Log:
2007-10-12 Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-12 08:42 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 12:10 ---
Also
because in fold_binary where we handle this kind of stuff we have
if (!offset0 || !offset1
|| TREE_TYPE (offset0) == TREE_TYPE (offset1))
{
...
is no longer
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-11 11:57 ---
The original issue seems to no longer trigger with the testcase, the missed
combining is fixed with a patch I have.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Add
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-05 17:07 ---
Depends on (and is partly fixed by) PR30965.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-26 09:53 ---
And note that before TER we have
p_108 = &this_91->a3.x[0];
D.3632_327 = p_108 + 15B;
if (p_108 <= D.3632_327) goto ; else goto ;
it sucks that we don't tree-combine COND_EXPRs. Testcase:
int foo(int p)
{
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-19 19:40 ---
Note that the reason mentioned was fixed recently, but we still have (in
.optimized):
:;
p = &D.2217->a2.x[0];
D.2237 = &D.2217->a2.x[2];
if (p < D.2237) goto ; else goto ;
...
:;
p = &D.2217->a3.x[0];
D
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-09 15:43 ---
Confirmed, this testcase is from PR 26197.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
