This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [committed] move constant to the right of relational operators (Re: [PATCH 4/5] distinguish likely and unlikely results (PR 78703))
- From: Martin Sebor <msebor at gmail dot com>
- To: Bernhard Reutner-Fischer <rep dot dot dot nop at gmail dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 17:23:37 -0700
- Subject: Re: [committed] move constant to the right of relational operators (Re: [PATCH 4/5] distinguish likely and unlikely results (PR 78703))
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <862fa0b0-e91d-0d48-6e11-0cad06375379@gmail.com> <c8d1bda4-a3cc-4e8b-16b2-d7781a0c6161@redhat.com> <8ee5e5ba-5e13-bf35-787a-ae2f9b6ad5a0@gmail.com> <09E78EFF-C159-4522-AD9A-5681B2C21D5A@gmail.com>
On 01/31/2017 01:49 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
On 31 January 2017 00:19:46 CET, Martin Sebor <msebor@gmail.com> wrote:
So I see the introduction of many
if (const OP object) expressions
Can you please fix those as an independent patch after #4 and #5 are
installed on the trunk? Consider that patch pre-approved, but please
post it here for the historical record.
I think a regexp of paren followed by a constant would probably take
you
to them pretty quickly.
I committed the attached patch in r245040.
The majority of these are not equivalent and I'm curious why they aren't?
All the changes in that revision should be equivalent to the original
code and thus no-ops. If you spotted some that aren't that wouldn't
be good (and should cause test failures). If you see some I messed
up please point them out.
Thanks
Martin