[Bug tree-optimization/103857] implement ternary without jump (and comparison)

2021-12-29 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103857 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3) > Reduced testcase: > int f(int a, int b, int c) > { > if (a != b && a != c) __builtin_unreachable(); > return a == b ? b : c; > } > > This should just transl

[Bug tree-optimization/103857] implement ternary without jump (and comparison)

2021-12-29 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103857 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Keywords|

[Bug tree-optimization/103857] implement ternary without jump (and comparison)

2021-12-29 Thread drepper.fsp+rhbz at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103857 --- Comment #2 from Ulrich Drepper --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1) > I don't think that's equivalent. You're right, I tried to generalize the code and failed. I my actual case this was a single variable the compiler saw the ass

[Bug tree-optimization/103857] implement ternary without jump (and comparison)

2021-12-29 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103857 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1