On Fri, 17 Mar 2023, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> As written in the PR, newlib headers aren't C11 compliant in that they
> don't define CMPLXF macro, and glibc before 2.16 doesn't define that
> either. I think it is easier to use __builtin_complex directly, over
> another patch which keeps including complex.h but defines CMPLXF if it
> isn't defined, we want to test how forwprop behaves rather than what
> complex.h defines or doesn't define.
>
> Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk?
OK.
> 2023-03-17 Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com>
>
> PR testsuite/109145
> * gcc.dg/tree-ssa/forwprop-39.c: Don't include complex.h.
> (foo): Use __builtin_complex rather than CMPLXF.
>
> --- gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/forwprop-39.c.jj 2023-03-13
> 10:18:59.545433477 +0100
> +++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-ssa/forwprop-39.c 2023-03-16
> 18:49:40.563504504 +0100
> @@ -1,14 +1,12 @@
> /* { dg-do compile } */
> /* { dg-options "-std=c11 -O2 -fdump-tree-forwprop1 -fdump-tree-optimized" }
> */
>
> -#include <complex.h>
> -
> extern void push1(void *p, float _Complex x);
> void foo (void *q, float _Complex *x)
> {
> float r = __real *x;
> float i = __imag *x;
> - push1 (q, CMPLXF (r, i));
> + push1 (q, __builtin_complex (r, i));
> }
>
> /* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-not "COMPLEX_EXPR" "forwprop1" } } */
>
> Jakub
>
>
--
Richard Biener <rguent...@suse.de>
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Frankenstrasse 146, 90461 Nuernberg,
Germany; GF: Ivo Totev, Andrew Myers, Andrew McDonald, Boudien Moerman;
HRB 36809 (AG Nuernberg)
