[Bug middle-end/18424] 3.4.3 ~6x+ performance regression vs 3.3.1, constant trees not being computed.

[joseph at codesourcery dot com]

------- Additional Comments From joseph at codesourcery dot com  2004-11-11 16:22 -------
Subject: Re:  3.4.3 ~6x+ performance regression vs
 3.3.1, constant trees not being computed.

Have you actually tried compiling code identical to that you test but with 
8388608L in place of (1L << 23) before making claims about what is done 
with constant expressions?

Your example may suggest a regression, provided no type sizes changed for 
your target between the versions compared, but you really shouldn't report 
conjectures about the cause of a bug without clear evidence to 
substantiate them, which in this case would involve substituting the value 
of the constant expression in the testcase.



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18424