[Bug rtl-optimization/92342] [10 Regression] a small missed transformation into x?b:0

[rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92342

--- Comment #6 from Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #5)
> So if the AND-based idiom is now preferred, shouldn't the if-then-else
> variant be transformed into it?  Similarly for IOR, when we get
> 
> (IOR (NEG (<cond-op>)) (reg))
> 
> from
> 
> (IF_THEN_ELSE (<cond-op>)
>   (reg)
>   (const_int -1))

except that should be 

(IF_THEN_ELSE (<cond-op>')
  (reg)
  (const_int -1))

Where <cond-op>' is the reversed condition.