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 middle-end/81814] [5/6/7/8 Regression] Incorrect behaviour at -O0 (conditional operator)


https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81814

--- Comment #11 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> ---
On Thu, 17 Aug 2017, mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:

> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81814
> 
> Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
> 
>            What    |Removed                     |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>              Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
>            Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org      |mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
> 
> --- Comment #10 from Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> Nope, nothing breaks.  It occurred to me that we might get rid of it when I
> found out that the code comes from rms, 1992.  :)

I'm all for it - maybe you can do one further verification step in
instrumenting the number of cases it triggers during bootstrap?
Might be a bit awkward to only detect the cases where an actual
transform happens ...

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