This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Fix optimization regression in constant folder
> I see exactly 6 places in the middle-end that check TYPE_IS_SIZETYPE. All
> of them in fold-const.c. What I say is that if sizetypes are worth to
> be special for optimization, why don't optimization passes like VRP or =
> tree-ssa-reassoc.c not check for TYPE_IS_SIZETYPE?
Do they check for overflow properties? If not, why should they check for
sizetype: the only difference is overflow properties.
> You seem to have a testcase that shows that re-association is very important
> for you for sizetypes. Why can't you produce something out of it that you
> can show us?
I think Eric is working on that (these tend to be very large test
cases), but that's orthogonal to the definitional issue here.