https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88784
Qi Feng changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ffengqi at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88784
--- Comment #3 from Qi Feng ---
I have extended the transformations as following, the first five are the
original ones:
* unsigned
Use UINT_MAX for demonstration, similar for UCHAR_MAX, USHRT_MAX, UINT_MAX,
ULONG_MAX, ULLONG_MAX
x > y
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88784
--- Comment #4 from Qi Feng ---
The fourth to the last should be:
x < y || x != INT_MAX --> x != UINT_MAX
sorry for the typo.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88784
--- Comment #5 from Qi Feng ---
(In reply to Qi Feng from comment #4)
> The fourth to the last should be:
>
> x < y || x != INT_MAX --> x != UINT_MAX
>
> sorry for the typo.
x < y || x != INT_MAX --> x != INT_MAX
ty
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88784
--- Comment #7 from Qi Feng ---
I add some patterns in match.pd which handles the original 5 transformations.
But I don't the language used in match.pd well, the patterns I wrote are very
similar.
And I haven't found predicates for constant valu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88784
--- Comment #9 from Qi Feng ---
And there's another problem. Take `x > y && x != 0 --> x > y' for
example, I would also like to do
x < y && y != 0 --> x < y
x != 0 && x > y --> x > y
y != 0 && x < y --> x < y
If t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88784
--- Comment #11 from Qi Feng ---
I tried 2 patterns for the following test
/* 1. x > y && x != 0 --> x > y */
/* 2. y < x && x != 0 --> y < x */
/* 3. x != 0 && x > y --> x > y */
/* 4. x != 0 && y <
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88784
--- Comment #14 from Qi Feng ---
Checking .original and .optimized file is just a quick method I use to check
whether an optimization happened (if not happen in first and last pass,
probably it didn't happen). I didn't mean or think the transfor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88784
--- Comment #18 from Qi Feng ---
I only learned gcc for about 2 months, and I have to say that I don't fully
understand what you guys were saying. Is match.pd the right place to fix this
issue? Am I in the wrong direction?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88784
--- Comment #20 from Qi Feng ---
I have tried to merge signed and unsigned together:
/* x > y && x != ( 0 or XXX_MIN ) --> x > y */
(for and (truth_and bit_and)
(simplify
(and:c (gt:c@3 @0 @1) (ne @0 INTEGER_CST@2))
(if (INTEGRAL_T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88784
--- Comment #22 from Qi Feng ---
Two more similar ones:
x <= y && x == ( 0 or XXX_MIN ) --> x == ( 0 or XXX_MIN )
x >= y && x == ( UXXX_MAX or XXX_MAX ) --> x == ( UXXX_MAX or XXX_MAX )
11 matches
Mail list logo
