On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 5:56 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Richard Biener
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 12:53 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
Hi,
Simplification of (T1)(X *+- CST) is already implemented
On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 5:56 PM, Bin.Cheng wrote:
> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Richard Biener
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 12:53 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> Simplification of (T1)(X *+- CST) is already implemented in
>>> aff_combination_expand,
>>> this patch moves it to tree
On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 12:53 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
>> Hi,
>> Simplification of (T1)(X *+- CST) is already implemented in
>> aff_combination_expand,
>> this patch moves it to tree_to_aff_combination. It also supports unsigned
>> types
>>
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 12:53 PM, Bin Cheng wrote:
> Hi,
> Simplification of (T1)(X *+- CST) is already implemented in
> aff_combination_expand,
> this patch moves it to tree_to_aff_combination. It also supports unsigned
> types
> if range information allows the transformation, as well as speci
Hi,
Simplification of (T1)(X *+- CST) is already implemented in
aff_combination_expand,
this patch moves it to tree_to_aff_combination. It also supports unsigned types
if range information allows the transformation, as well as special case (T1)(X
+ X).
Is it OK?
Thanks,
bin
2017-04-11 Bin Chen
