http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56888
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #21 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
-fno-tree-loop-distribute-patterns is the reliable way to not transform loops
into library calls.
As of the trivial case of generating a recursion - yes, that's reasonably
easy to avoid in simple cases. But if you consider
t1.c
----
mymemcpy_impl (...)
{
for (...)
...
}
t2.c
----
memcpy ()
{
mymemcpy_impl ()
}
then it's no longer possible to detect conservatively without severely
restricting the set of functions we can operate on.
Not sure if/how other compilers avoid the above situation (or if they
do this at all or rather use private entries into the library functions).
