This is the mail archive of the gcc-bugs@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]

[Bug c/35456] Different results for inlined vs. non-inlined function



------- Comment #2 from pinskia at gmail dot com  2008-03-04 08:49 -------
Subject: Re:  Different results for inlined vs. non-inlined function



Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 4, 2008, at 0:40, "ubizjak at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org 
 > wrote:

>
>
> ------- Comment #1 from ubizjak at gmail dot com  2008-03-04 08:40  
> -------
> Hm, -0.0 >= 0.0 is folded to TRUE, as confirmed by:
>
> printf ("%i\n", -0.0 >= 0.0);
>
> This produces 1.
>

That is correct. The noinline case is wrong. It should not be  
converted to be abs.

-- Pinski

>
> -- 
>
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35456
>


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35456


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