[Bug tree-optimization/104389] [10/11/12 Regression] HUGE_VAL * 0.0 is no longer a NaN

[glisse at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104389

--- Comment #6 from Marc Glisse <glisse at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Not this bug, but note that the comment and the code don't match in this
transformation: "a negative value" becomes !tree_expr_maybe_real_minus_zero_p
(@0) which is quite different. I am not sure the path with a negative @0 for
which tree_expr_maybe_real_minus_zero_p returns false can be reached though.