[Bug middle-end/37908] [4.2/4.3/4.4 regression] atomic NAND op generate wrong code; __sync_nand_and_fetch, __sync_fetch_and_nand

[kokseng at ieee dot org]

------- Comment #7 from kokseng at ieee dot org  2008-10-29 09:37 -------
The only problem is whether there are codes out there that depend on
"NEGATE-and-AND"?     Frankly speaking,  when I was reminded about the 'nand'
comment on gcc manual, only then I remembered many moons ago, I read that line,
and also remembered saying to myself "W-T-F".  However, many moons later, when
I work on porting to other processor and test-the-unit-test, I relied on
text-book and historical definition of the term 'NAND'.  So, I think it is not
an issue of what Intel ICC did, it is matter of getting the semantic of NAND
the way any programmer was taught and practiced.

Propagating a misnomer will only guarantee that this issue of " NAND is not
NAND but 'N'AND" will come back to haunt every now-and-then.  IMHO, it is
better to bite the bullet now then swallow a canon later.

 :-)


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37908