http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53774
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53774
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53774
--- Comment #6 from Richard Guenther 2012-06-27
11:29:08 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Jun 27 11:29:04 2012
New Revision: 189012
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=189012
Log:
2012-06-27 Richard Guenther
PR tree-op
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53774
--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de
2012-06-27 08:28:27 UTC ---
On Tue, 26 Jun 2012, wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53774
>
> --- Comment #3 from William J. Schmidt
> 2012-06-26 18:42
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53774
--- Comment #4 from William J. Schmidt 2012-06-26
18:52:44 UTC ---
Yeah, looking at the test case it's an uninitialized variable. Seems like a
hole in the ranking system that it gets a rank of zero. I think a default
value that isn't a parm sho
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53774
--- Comment #3 from William J. Schmidt 2012-06-26
18:42:41 UTC ---
I wonder why fp_6(D) gets a rank of zero. Is it an uninitialized variable or a
parameter? Parms are supposed to get small positive numbers for ranks. Maybe
the "right" fix is t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53774
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53774
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
