https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114083
--- Comment #7 from Maciej W. Rozycki ---
(In reply to Roland Illig from comment #6)
> There's a problem with the wording though. On a platform that doesn't
> support conditional-move operations, it's not possible to _use_
> conditional-move ope
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114083
--- Comment #6 from Roland Illig ---
(In reply to Maciej W. Rozycki from comment #4)
> The flag enables the use of the conditional-move operations even with
> hardware that has no support for such operations, hence unconditionally.
Thank you fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114083
--- Comment #5 from Andreas Schwab ---
Enable conditional-move operations even if unsupported by hardware.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114083
--- Comment #4 from Maciej W. Rozycki ---
The flag enables the use of the conditional-move operations even with
hardware that has no support for such operations, hence unconditionally.
Such operations, where unavailable, are then synthesized as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114083
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||macro at orcam dot me.uk
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114083
--- Comment #2 from Roland Illig ---
I don't understand why the word 'unconditionally' is necessary or useful here.
Isn't the option -mmovcc by itself already a condition? That would make the
word 'unconditionally' wrong.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114083
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
This is not a play on words though. The flag enables the use of "conditional
moves" always (unconditionally).
