This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: optimization/9016: [3.2/3.3/3.4 regression] Failure to consistently constant fold "constant" C++ objects
- From: bangerth at dealii dot org
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-prs at gcc dot gnu dot org, martin at xemacs dot org, nobody at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 21 Dec 2002 18:47:44 -0000
- Subject: Re: optimization/9016: [3.2/3.3/3.4 regression] Failure to consistently constant fold "constant" C++ objects
- Reply-to: bangerth at dealii dot org, gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-prs at gcc dot gnu dot org, martin at xemacs dot org, nobody at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-gnats at gcc dot gnu dot org
Old Synopsis: Failure to consistently constant fold "constant" C++ objects
New Synopsis: [3.2/3.3/3.4 regression] Failure to consistently constant fold "constant" C++ objects
State-Changed-From-To: open->analyzed
State-Changed-By: bangerth
State-Changed-When: Sat Dec 21 10:47:43 2002
State-Changed-Why:
Confirmed. This is actually a regression: up to gcc3.0.4,
all four functions were compiled just as f1(), i.e. in
an optimal way. Starting with 3.2, f2-f4 show the behavior
Martin demonstrated. Not good :-(
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=9016