[Bug other/23469] Behaviour of built-in __signbitf(x) differs with optimization

2005-08-21 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-21 20:31 --- Again this is not a bug as signbitf says about nonzero value and nothing about the exact value. In fact it changes based on optimizations is because well some times it is for size reasons, look at -Os an

[Bug other/23469] Behaviour of built-in __signbitf(x) differs with optimization

2005-08-21 Thread ddneilson at gmail dot com
--- Additional Comments From ddneilson at gmail dot com 2005-08-21 20:28 --- One of the really odd things, that makes me still think this is a bug in some way is that the definition of "mysignbit()" that I gave in signbit.cpp is identical to the definition of __signbitf(x) as given in bi

[Bug other/23469] Behaviour of built-in __signbitf(x) differs with optimization

2005-08-18 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-18 21:41 --- This is not a bug as signbit just have to return a non zero value if it has the value passed has its sign bit set. So defining it this way: inline int mysignbit(float x) { union { float f; unsigned int i

[Bug other/23469] Behaviour of built-in __signbitf(x) differs with optimization

2005-08-18 Thread ddneilson at gmail dot com
--- Additional Comments From ddneilson at gmail dot com 2005-08-18 20:49 --- Created an attachment (id=9541) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9541&action=view) Output from running the program with -O1 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23469

[Bug other/23469] Behaviour of built-in __signbitf(x) differs with optimization

2005-08-18 Thread ddneilson at gmail dot com
--- Additional Comments From ddneilson at gmail dot com 2005-08-18 20:49 --- Created an attachment (id=9540) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9540&action=view) Output from running the program without optimizations -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=234

[Bug other/23469] Behaviour of built-in __signbitf(x) differs with optimization

2005-08-18 Thread ddneilson at gmail dot com
-- What|Removed |Added Attachment #9537|Ouput from compile with: g++|Output from compile with: description|-Wall -v -save-temps|g++ -Wall -v -save-temps

[Bug other/23469] Behaviour of built-in __signbitf(x) differs with optimization

2005-08-18 Thread ddneilson at gmail dot com
--- Additional Comments From ddneilson at gmail dot com 2005-08-18 20:47 --- Created an attachment (id=9539) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9539&action=view) Output from compile with: g++ -Wall -v -O1 -save-temps signbit.cpp -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_b

[Bug other/23469] Behaviour of built-in __signbitf(x) differs with optimization

2005-08-18 Thread ddneilson at gmail dot com
--- Additional Comments From ddneilson at gmail dot com 2005-08-18 20:46 --- Created an attachment (id=9538) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9538&action=view) .ii file generated by compiling with: g++ -Wall -v -O1 -save-temps signbit.cpp -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bug

[Bug other/23469] Behaviour of built-in __signbitf(x) differs with optimization

2005-08-18 Thread ddneilson at gmail dot com
--- Additional Comments From ddneilson at gmail dot com 2005-08-18 20:45 --- Created an attachment (id=9537) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9537&action=view) Ouput from compile with: g++ -Wall -v -save-temps signbit.cpp -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cg

[Bug other/23469] Behaviour of built-in __signbitf(x) differs with optimization

2005-08-18 Thread ddneilson at gmail dot com
--- Additional Comments From ddneilson at gmail dot com 2005-08-18 20:44 --- Created an attachment (id=9536) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9536&action=view) .ii file generated by compiling with: g++ -Wall -v -save-temps signbit.cpp -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug other/23469] Behaviour of built-in __signbitf(x) differs with optimization

2005-08-18 Thread ddneilson at gmail dot com
--- Additional Comments From ddneilson at gmail dot com 2005-08-18 20:43 --- Created an attachment (id=9535) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9535&action=view) Source file of example -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23469