[patch fold-const.c]: Add some missing optimizations about binary and and truth-not

Jeff Law law@redhat.com
Mon Jun 20 16:16:00 GMT 2011

Hash: SHA1

On 06/20/11 09:34, NightStrike wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:47 AM, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:37:30AM -0400, NightStrike wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 8:06 AM, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 01:50:26PM +0200, Kai Tietz wrote:
>>>>> Applied at revision 175206 to trunk.
>>>> There is no need to post such notices to gcc-patches, we have the gcc-cvs
>>>> mailing list where this is automatically posted to.
>>>> On gcc-patches it just adds unnecessary noise.
>>> Until there is some way to easily map an email on gcc-patches to an
>>> email on gcc-cvs, or a legitimate patch tracker instead of just
>>> mailing lists, then it is very useful "noise".  I've found at least a
>>> hundred dropped patches so far for our project alone.  You can always
>>> just delete the email instead of reading it.
>> No, our guidelines say that such mails shouldn't be sent:
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/svnwrite.html
>> "When you have checked in a patch exactly as it has been approved, you do
>> not need to tell that to people -- including the approver. People
>> interested in when a particular patch is committed can check SVN or the
>> gcc-cvs list."
> "do not need" != "cannot"
>> This has been discussed several times.  So no, this noise isn't at all
>> useful nor welcome.
> useful or welcome.... TO YOU.  Obviously, it's useful to us.
Umm, it's neither welcome nor useful to many folks -- that's why the
guidelines are there.

If you want commit acks, then extract them from the gcc-cvs list.  They
do not belong on gcc-patches.

Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/


More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list