--- Comment #6 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-10 11:25 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 32044 ***
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-10 11:24 ---
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32044#c5
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38453
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2008-12-10 11:20 ---
Subject: Re: Output code optimisation excessive use of builtins
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 10, 2008, at 2:51 AM, "steven at gcc dot gnu dot org"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
> --- Comment #3 from steven at g
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 10, 2008, at 2:51 AM, "steven at gcc dot gnu dot org" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
--- Comment #3 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-10
10:51 ---
Investigating.
There is no reason to investigate. The reason why this change
happened was bec
--- Comment #3 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-10 10:51 ---
Investigating.
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|una
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-10 00:25 ---
I don't see an issue here really, the code got optimized to just:
:
prop0.24 = *propsData;
prop0 = prop0.24;
goto ;
:
propsRes->pb = [plus_expr] propsRes->pb + 1;
prop0 = prop0 + 211;
:
if (prop0 > 44)
--- Comment #1 from vince at simtec dot co dot uk 2008-12-09 14:51 ---
Created an attachment (id=16854)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16854&action=view)
Trivial test code to show behaviour
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38453
