--- Comment #14 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-17 19:17
---
*** Bug 27647 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #13 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-08 16:44
---
*** Bug 24737 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-03
19:55 ---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-03
19:55 ---
Subject: Bug 23326
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-03 19:54:51
Modified files:
gcc: Change
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-01
15:18 ---
It's in the tracker and I pinged it once already. One could commit it as
obvious, though ;)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23326
--- Additional Comments From matz at suse dot de 2005-09-01 15:11 ---
This still isn't in the 4.0 branch. Perhaps ping it?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23326
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-22
12:15 ---
*** Bug 23512 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-12
10:57 ---
Patch posted.
--
What|Removed |Added
URL||http://
--- Additional Comments From belyshev at depni dot sinp dot msu dot ru
2005-08-11 18:05 ---
// self-contained C++ testcase, compile with -O2
extern "C" void abort (void);
int j;
void foo (bool x, bool y)
{
if (!x)
j = 0;
if (!x == y)
j = 1;
}
int main (void)
{
foo (1, 1
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu 2005-08-11
17:45 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] Wrong code from forwprop
On Aug 11, 2005, at 1:43 PM, rguenth at tat dot physik dot
uni-tuebingen dot de wrote:
> because else we might get f.i. LE_EXPR passing through?
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at tat dot physik dot uni-tuebingen
dot de 2005-08-11 17:43 ---
I'll do that. Though
+ /* If we don't have , then we cannot
+optimize this case. */
+ if ((cond_code == NE_EXPR || cond_code == EQ_EXPR)
+
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
16:03 ---
Created an attachment (id=9474)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9474&action=view)
Patch which fixes but needs testing
This patch fixes the problem by continuing if we don't have a SSA_NA
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
15:51 ---
Oh, this is truely fixed for 4.1 and not a latent bug there.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23326
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-11
15:29 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
E
--
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.0.2
Known to work||4.1.0
Target Milestone|--- |4.
15 matches
Mail list logo
