On 12/05/2016 10:00 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
As the testcase shows, we also want to fold "abcd" + 3 != NULL
at constant time. The following patch fixes that.
Additionally, I think if !indirect_base0 then we basically want to compare
whether the base0's value rather than address is non-NULL,
Hi!
As the testcase shows, we also want to fold "abcd" + 3 != NULL
at constant time. The following patch fixes that.
Additionally, I think if !indirect_base0 then we basically want to compare
whether the base0's value rather than address is non-NULL, which we can't
optimize. All we can optimize