This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug tree-optimization/19516] missed optimization (bool)
- From: "law at redhat dot com" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 25 Apr 2005 05:05:28 -0000
- Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/19516] missed optimization (bool)
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2005-04-25 05:05 -------
Subject: Re: missed optimization (bool)
On Sat, 2005-04-23 at 13:49 +0000, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> ------- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-23 13:49 -------
> I guess it will be not possible to fix this for 4.0.1?
I probably wouldn't recommend it. I wouldn't want to take the chance
of introducing a wrong-code regression in an attempt to fix a missed
optimization in a minor release.
If someone wants to ponder it further, they'll need to pick up the
tree-ssa-threadupdate changes from earlier this year (to avoid creating
irreducible regions), Diego's vectorizer fix, my reload fix and, of
course the changes to the threading code in tree-ssa-dom.c.