This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [PR71078] x / abs(x) -> copysign (1.0, x)

From: Prathamesh Kulkarni <prathamesh dot kulkarni at linaro dot org>
To: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
Cc: Richard Sandiford <richard dot sandiford at arm dot com>, Richard Biener <rguenther at suse dot de>, gcc Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 11:33:56 +0530
Subject: Re: [PR71078] x / abs(x) -> copysign (1.0, x)
Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
References: <CAAgBjM=E8-YEMumvRN0PwD1t1xxZb7iLQGhg2tOh+95gnaN5kA@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LSU.2.11.1607261359460.30444@t29.fhfr.qr> <8760rsa5lz.fsf@e105548-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1607292126090.24174@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>

On 30 July 2016 at 02:57, Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Jul 2016, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>
>> (which are really just extended tree codes).  I suppose copysign is
>> a special case since we can always open code it, but in general we
>> shouldn't fall back to something that could generate a call.
>
> We can't always open code copysign (IBM long double, see PR 58797).
Hi,
Thanks for pointing that out.
The attached patch doesn't transform x/abs(x) -> copysign(1.0, x)
for long double.
OK for trunk ?

Thanks,
Prathamesh
>
> --
> Joseph S. Myers
> joseph@codesourcery.com

Attachment: patch-3.txt
Description: Text document

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PR71078] x / abs(x) -> copysign (1.0, x)
  - From: Richard Biener

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]