[Bug tree-optimization/88280] missing folding of logical and bitwise AND

2023-10-12 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88280 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned a

[Bug tree-optimization/88280] missing folding of logical and bitwise AND

2023-05-06 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88280 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gabravier at gmail dot com --- Comment #

[Bug tree-optimization/88280] missing folding of logical and bitwise AND

2018-12-14 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88280 --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1) > Confirmed. g and h end up like this before RTL expansion (initial folding > produces this): > > j_6 = i_4(D) & a_5(D); > _1 = i_4(D) != 0; > _2 = j_6 !=

[Bug tree-optimization/88280] missing folding of logical and bitwise AND

2018-12-01 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88280 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org Sev

[Bug tree-optimization/88280] missing folding of logical and bitwise AND

2018-11-30 Thread denis.campredon at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88280 --- Comment #2 from denis.campredon at gmail dot com --- I don't know if I should create a separate bug report or not, since it looks kind of related. I've tried to replace the operator of the function e with other and it generates a branch with t

[Bug tree-optimization/88280] missing folding of logical and bitwise AND

2018-11-30 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88280 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization Status|