This is the mail archive of the gcc@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]

Re: pre_inc/pre_dec/PUSH_ROUNDING inconsistency

To: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>
Subject: Re: pre_inc/pre_dec/PUSH_ROUNDING inconsistency
From: Richard Henderson <rth at cygnus dot com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 14:16:04 -0700
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
References: <20000716160420.A26370@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <20000717140714.D13024@cygnus.com> <20000717231040.F27658@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>

On Mon, Jul 17, 2000 at 11:10:40PM +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> Yes, but whats about the floating point stores. I remember Jeff claiming
> that (subreg:TF (reg:XF)) is incorrect...
> is (subreg:TI (reg:XF)) better?

Yes, the TFmode subreg is incorrect.  As for the other... well,
I guess it's not too bad.  I'm not sure what to put in its place.

r~

Follow-Ups:
- Re: pre_inc/pre_dec/PUSH_ROUNDING inconsistency
  - From: Jan Hubicka
- Re: pre_inc/pre_dec/PUSH_ROUNDING inconsistency
  - From: Richard Henderson

References:
- pre_inc/pre_dec/PUSH_ROUNDING inconsistency
  - From: Jan Hubicka
- Re: pre_inc/pre_dec/PUSH_ROUNDING inconsistency
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: pre_inc/pre_dec/PUSH_ROUNDING inconsistency
  - From: Jan Hubicka

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