This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug fortran/69368] [6 Regression] spec2006 test case 416.gamess fails with the g++ 6.0 compiler starting with r232508
- From: "dominiq at lps dot ens.fr" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 09:51:46 +0000
- Subject: [Bug fortran/69368] [6 Regression] spec2006 test case 416.gamess fails with the g++ 6.0 compiler starting with r232508
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-69368-4 at http dot gcc dot gnu dot org/bugzilla/>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368
--- Comment #65 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
> There is obviously no "rationale". Fact is that we don't exploit the
> undefinedness explicitely but just as a side-effect of how CSE works in
> DOM now. This means we don't propagate '1' as the only valid value of I
> but just CSE the last three loads to the first as we know they are the
> same (without knowing the actual value).
How can K(1) and K(2*1) be the same without using undefinedness explicitely?