------- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-03 13:10
-------
Reduced testcase:
package P is
Name_Buffer : String (1 .. 100);
Name_Len : Natural;
procedure Proc (S : String);
end P;
package body P is
procedure Proc (S : String) is
N : constant Integer := S'Length;
begin
Name_Buffer (1 + N .. Name_Len + N) := Name_Buffer (1 .. Name_Len);
Name_Buffer (1 .. N) := S;
Name_Len := Name_Len + N;
end;
end P;
Fallout of:
2007-06-30 Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Fix PR tree-optimization/32540
Fix PR tree-optimization/31651
* tree-ssa-sccvn.c: New file.
* tree-ssa-sccvn.h: Ditto.
Value numbering D.759_64 stmt = D.759_64 = &p__name_buffer[1]{lb: 1 sz: 1} +
n_32;
RHS &p__name_buffer[1]{lb: 1 sz: 1} + n_32 simplified to
&p__name_buffer[(<unnamed-signed:32>) MAX_EXPR <D.738_31, 0> + 1]{lb: 1 sz: 1}
has constants 0
The replacement expression is is_gimple_min_invariant because TREE_INVARIANT
so simplify_binary_expression accepts it:
/* Make sure result is not a complex expression consiting
of operators of operators (IE (a + b) + (a + c))
Otherwise, we will end up with unbounded expressions if
fold does anything at all. */
if (result)
{
if (is_gimple_min_invariant (result))
return result;
else if (SSA_VAR_P (result))
return result;
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32589
