------- Additional Comments From schlie at comcast dot net 2004-10-19 21:53 ------- Subject: Re: not using qi version of divmod
I agree that the missed optimizations won't produce incorrect results, just very inefficient ones. As all rhs argument optimizations seem to be properly identified, and yet no lhs's are; it would imply to me that where ever in gcc argument signatures are being computed or used for the purpose of built-in function selection, it's inappropriately ignoring lhs argument type compatibility; would you agree with that somewhat crude assessment? Thanks again,-paul- > From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 19 Oct 2004 21:39:27 -0000 > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [Bug target/18065] not using qi version of divmod > > > ------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-19 > 21:39 ------- > I don't know but as I said this is correct code and not a wrong code problem > but just a missed > optimization somewhere. > > -- > What |Removed |Added > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW > Ever Confirmed| |1 > GCC build triplet|powerpc-apple-darwin7.5.0 | > GCC host triplet|powerpc-apple-darwin7.5.0 | > Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2004-10-19 21:39:26 > date| | > Summary|wrong built-in functions |not using qi version of > |selected |divmod > > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18065 > > ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- > You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18065
