http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58845
--- Comment #12 from Marc Glisse <glisse at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #9) > Yeah, exactly. Still if there is a sequence point at && or || > (even if both arms are always executed) then the order of evaluating > side-effects is important. IIRC only AND/ORIF have an implicit > sequence point during gimplification. We have avoided generating TRUTH_*_EXPR for vectors (at your request IIRC), so I don't think we should produce some in the front-end now, even if temporarily, as they would leak into fold-const.c. It seems easiest to save_expr the lhs and build a compound_expr(lhs,*) to enforce the evaluation of the lhs first, I think that gets us a sequence point as well.
