Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: oneill+gccbugs at cs dot hmc.edu
LLVM lacks an intrinsic for performing bitwise rotation, relying instead on
spotting the classic C idioms for specifying
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62263
--- Comment #1 from M.E. O'Neill ---
Possibly this should have been filed as a tree-level bug? Also, see
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17886 which mostly is about issues
with wider types, but may also cover this bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62263
--- Comment #6 from M.E. O'Neill ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #3)
> We handle at least
> (x << n) | (x >> ((-n) & 31))
> (N can be 0 here) since PR57157.
Although this code does work with LLVM, testing with GCC 4.9.0, and this
im
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: oneill+gccbugs at cs dot hmc.edu
This code defines two constexpr values that are equivalent. But one of them
produces a spurious warning
template
struct DoesntWarn {
static constexpr
