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

Re: [PATCH]: Handle CONJ_EXPR in negate_expr_p and fold_negate_expr

From: Paolo Bonzini <paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch>
To: Richard Guenther <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
Cc: "Kaveh R. GHAZI" <ghazi at caip dot rutgers dot edu>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2007 10:54:44 +0100
Subject: Re: [PATCH]: Handle CONJ_EXPR in negate_expr_p and fold_negate_expr
References: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0702050312310.9585@caipclassic.rutgers.edu> <45C6FC20.2030206@lu.unisi.ch> <84fc9c000702050152l35508410x9f4ba44f33edbacf@mail.gmail.com>

For example, (a,b) + -~(x,5) would change to (a,b) + (-x,5) which is
wrong; but (a,b) + -~(5,x) would change to (a,b) + (-5,x) which is ok.


The patch does fold -~z to ~-z which is ok, can you elaborate why
-~(x,5) -> (-x,5) is wrong?  (it wouldn't do that, beause negate_expr_p
will return false for (x,5))

For the same reason which Kaveh explained in his previous patch.

Paolo

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH]: Handle CONJ_EXPR in negate_expr_p and fold_negate_expr
  - From: Richard Guenther

References:
- [PATCH]: Handle CONJ_EXPR in negate_expr_p and fold_negate_expr
  - From: Kaveh R. GHAZI
- Re: [PATCH]: Handle CONJ_EXPR in negate_expr_p and fold_negate_expr
  - From: Paolo Bonzini
- Re: [PATCH]: Handle CONJ_EXPR in negate_expr_p and fold_negate_expr
  - From: Richard Guenther

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