On 11/05/2016 10:32 PM, Aaron Sawdey wrote:
On Fri, 2016-11-04 at 20:43 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
So what's the motivation here? When we don't have any constants
then
I'd think we'd be better off punting into the library.
When none of the args to strncmp are constant, I'd be inclined to
agree. H
On Mon, 2016-11-07 at 15:26 +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> Your patchset doesn't contain a testcase so I really wonder which
> case
> we know the string length but it is not constant.
>
> Yes, there's COND_EXPR handling in c_strlen but that should be mostly
> dead code -- the real code should be u
On Sun, Nov 6, 2016 at 5:32 AM, Aaron Sawdey
wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-11-04 at 20:43 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
>> So what's the motivation here? When we don't have any constants
>> then
>> I'd think we'd be better off punting into the library.
>
> When none of the args to strncmp are constant, I'd be i
On Fri, 2016-11-04 at 20:43 -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> So what's the motivation here? When we don't have any constants
> then
> I'd think we'd be better off punting into the library.
When none of the args to strncmp are constant, I'd be inclined to
agree. However the current state of affairs is th
On 11/01/2016 04:29 PM, Aaron Sawdey wrote:
Builtin expansion of strncmp currently only happens when at least one
of the string arguments is a constant string. I'd like to make it also
attempt expansion of the cmpstrnsi pattern in the case where neither
argument is a constant string, as is alread
Builtin expansion of strncmp currently only happens when at least one
of the string arguments is a constant string. I'd like to make it also
attempt expansion of the cmpstrnsi pattern in the case where neither
argument is a constant string, as is already done with cmpstrsi in
expand_builtin_strcmp.
