On 04/30/2015 05:07 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Thu, 30 Apr 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
I have in my local dev tree (so completely untested...)
@@ -1040,31 +1052,22 @@ (define_operator_list CBRT BUILT_IN_CBRT
operation and convert the
On 04/30/2015 03:38 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Thu, 30 Apr 2015, Jeff Law wrote:
On 04/30/2015 01:17 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
+/* This is another case of narrowing, specifically when there's an
outer
+ BIT_AND_EXPR which masks off bits outside the type of the innermost
+ operands. Like the
On Thu, 30 Apr 2015, Jeff Law wrote:
On 04/30/2015 01:17 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
+/* This is another case of narrowing, specifically when there's an outer
+ BIT_AND_EXPR which masks off bits outside the type of the innermost
+ operands. Like the previous case we have to convert the operan
On 04/30/2015 01:17 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
+/* This is another case of narrowing, specifically when there's an outer
+ BIT_AND_EXPR which masks off bits outside the type of the innermost
+ operands. Like the previous case we have to convert the operands
+ to unsigned types to avoid intro
On 04/30/2015 03:00 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
Without looking too close at this patch I'll note that we might want to
improve the previous one first to also handle a constant 2nd operand
for the operation (your new one also misses that).
Yea, I think you mentioned in that in the 47477 BZ as well
On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Apr 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
>
>> I have in my local dev tree (so completely untested...)
>>
>> @@ -1040,31 +1052,22 @@ (define_operator_list CBRT BUILT_IN_CBRT
>>operation and convert the result to the desired type. */
>> (
On Thu, 30 Apr 2015, Richard Biener wrote:
I have in my local dev tree (so completely untested...)
@@ -1040,31 +1052,22 @@ (define_operator_list CBRT BUILT_IN_CBRT
operation and convert the result to the desired type. */
(for op (plus minus)
(simplify
-(convert (op (convert@2 @0) (con
On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 5:52 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
>
> This is an incremental improvement to the type narrowing in match.pd. It's
> largely based on the pattern I added to fix 47477.
>
> Basically if we have
>
> (bit_and (arith_op (convert A) (convert B)) mask)
>
> Where the conversions are widening
On Wed, 29 Apr 2015, Jeff Law wrote:
This is an incremental improvement to the type narrowing in match.pd. It's
largely based on the pattern I added to fix 47477.
Basically if we have
(bit_and (arith_op (convert A) (convert B)) mask)
Where the conversions are widening and the mask turns off
