https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118466
--- Comment #4 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #3)
> Removing bounds checking seems like a dangerous idea in general...
We do that in plenty of cases. It's provably false here. If anything,
optimising bound checks bet
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118466
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118466
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Hmm, early-break should handle this in theory. It does:
>
> > ./cc1 -quiet t4.c -O3 -msse4 -fopt-info-vec -fdump-tree-optimized
> t4.c:3:24: optimized: loop v
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118466
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
Hmm, early-break should handle this in theory. It does:
> ./cc1 -quiet t4.c -O3 -msse4 -fopt-info-vec -fdump-tree-optimized
t4.c:3:24: optimized: loop vectorized using 16 byte vectors
t4.c:3:24: optimized
