--- Comment #13 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2006-08-10 08:32 ---
sure, but t1 and t2 die the moment they are assigned back. it would be just a
trick to return in memory, but not make s and c addressable all the way down to
RA.
though i don't remember how big a penalty is if your variab
--- Comment #12 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-10 08:16
---
Created an attachment (id=12055)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12055&action=view)
patch using cexp
Well, then you make t1 and t2 addressable. We could introduce a
__builtin_sane_sincos which
--- Comment #11 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2006-08-10 08:11 ---
If all that we care about is TREE_ADDRESSABLE, and not folding together with a
previous sin/cos call, we may just change
sincos (x, &s, &c);
to
sincos (x, &t1, &t2);
s = t1;
c = t2;
maybe?
--
http://gcc.gnu
--- Comment #10 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2006-08-10 08:08 ---
see patch at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-12/msg01151.html
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
