https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116821
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
So looking into why this does not work but PR 57380 does. The testcase in PR
57380 again has an ADDR_EXPR which just happens to be a pointer plus (with a
multiply).
_1 = &b.data[i_5];
_2 = &a.data[i_5]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116821
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note I will get to this tomorrow as the other 2 issues are easier and don't
need a little more thought about what is "cheaply".
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116821
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
We do handle:
```
struct f
{
int i;
};
int g(int i, int c, struct f *ff)
{
int *t;
if (c)
t = &i;
else
t = &ff->i;
return *t;
}
```
(from PR 21463), just because we have an ADDR_EXPR there.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116821
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot
gnu.org
