------- Additional Comments From uros at kss-loka dot si 2005-09-30 13:58 ------- Looking at the differences, the result of recip looks _really_ good!
Currently, there seems to be some problems, i.e.: double pov::f_polytubes(double*, unsigned int) (ptr, D.22748) - D.22787_46 = -6.28318530717958623199592693708837032318115234375e+0 / D.22783_80; + reciptmp.882_72 = 1.0e+0 / D.22783_80; + D.22787_46 = -6.28318530717958623199592693708837032318115234375e+0 * reciptmp.882_72; Not needed, only one user. Function double pov::POVFPU_RunDefault(pov::FUNCTION) <L193>:; - r0_1660 = r0_89 / r0_89; + reciptmp.492_84 = 1.0e+0 / r0_89; + r0_1660 = r0_89 * reciptmp.492_84; goto <bb 1062> (<L1339>); The result of above confusion is (1.0)! We are in fast-math, so no NaNs, etc.. void pov::Simulate_Media(pov::IMEDIA**, pov::RAY*, pov::INTERSECTION* - reciptmp.1152_907 = 1.0e+0 / prephitmp.1124_293; - reciptmp.1153_1046 = 1.0e+0 / prephitmp.1124_293; - reciptmp.1154_1041 = 1.0e+0 / prephitmp.1124_293; + reciptmp.1275_1270 = 1.0e+0 / prephitmp.1124_293; + reciptmp.1152_907 = 1.0e+0 * reciptmp.1275_1270; + reciptmp.1153_1046 = 1.0e+0 * reciptmp.1275_1270; + reciptmp.1154_1041 = 1.0e+0 * reciptmp.1275_1270; These are all the same? There are already reciptmp variables in loopdone that are all the same. And there are quite some places that have this problem. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24123
