[Bug tree-optimization/54481] missed optimization: unnecessary indirect call

[neleai at seznam dot cz]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54481

--- Comment #2 from Ondrej Bilka <neleai at seznam dot cz> 2012-09-05 09:42:27 UTC ---
On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 09:30:04AM +0000, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54481
> 
> Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
> 
>            What    |Removed                     |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>              Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
>    Last reconfirmed|                            |2012-09-05
>           Component|c                           |tree-optimization
>      Ever Confirmed|0                           |1
>            Severity|normal                      |enhancement
> 
> --- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-09-05 09:30:04 UTC ---
> The issue is that a.fn(&a) is _not_ pure.  foo is, but to see that a.fn is
> always foo we'd have to know a.fn is always foo ... (we are not optimistically
> assuming this which isn't easily possible within any of our memory optimization
> frameworks).
> 
> Confirmed anyway, in theory it should be possible.
Or allow pure attribute in function pointers that is now ignored.
> 
> -- 
> Configure bugmail: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
> ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
> You reported the bug.