This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug tree-optimization/18892] missed optimization with & and ==
- From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 9 Dec 2004 14:38:31 -0000
- Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/18892] missed optimization with & and ==
- References: <20041208201526.18892.pinskia@gcc.gnu.org>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-12-09 14:38 -------
(In reply to comment #4)
> when I compile this program with mainline. Isnt this what you claimed it should
> be compiled to? or are you claiming it should be optimized to 'return 0'?
I am claiming it should be compiled to "return 0". The full testcase which is closer to
what shows up in GCC is:
void f(int a
{
int i = a & -129;
if (i == 144)
link_error ();
]
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18892