This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: optimisation question
- From: Andreas Schwab <schwab at suse dot de>
- To: "Remy X.O. Martin" <vsxo at hotmail dot com>
- Cc: Joe Buck <Joe dot Buck at synopsys dot COM>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2005 18:26:22 +0100
- Subject: Re: optimisation question
- References: <20050131152659.0dc92d6c@portia.local><41FE6ADB.3070706@adacore.com> <20050131234317.GA4737@synopsys.com><20050201182110.192883b1@portia.local>
"Remy X.O. Martin" <vsxo@hotmail.com> writes:
> Here's another 'trick' I learned in those days: use a=b, c=d, e=f; rather
> than a=b; c=d; e=f; (like in the initialisation expression of a for
> loop). "The first version might be executed in parallel. Of course we
> don't have parellel machines here, but you never know..."
And of course it is wrong, because the comma operator creates a sequence
point (but K&R C didn't have sequence points yet).
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de
SuSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."