https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61867
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61867
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #3)
> I think that all that needs to happen is a warning is produced
> where either the detection or reduction takes place.
There is no single place, it's a result
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61867
--- Comment #3 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> I'm pretty sure gcc does detect it and optimizes appropriately, it just
> doesn't warn.
I've checked the output from using -S and I agree.
All the code to do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61867
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61867
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I'm pretty sure gcc does detect it and optimizes appropriately, it just doesn't
warn (because it's not a static analyzer)
