apparent typo in combine.c

[Zack Weinberg]

On Fri, Aug 17, 2001 at 03:35:22PM -0400, Richard Kenner wrote:
>     Now how can that be right?  Generate an arithmetic shift only if we
>     *don't* have an arithmetic shift insn for this mode?  I would think
>     that either the != and == should be swapped in the first two lines, 
> 
> I think that's correct.  Amazing this has been around for so long!

Which of the changes I suggested do you think is better?

Here's another one:

	      /* If OP0 is an AND and we don't have an AND in MODE either,
		 make a new AND in the proper mode.  */
	      if (GET_CODE (op0) == AND
		  && (add_optab->handlers[(int) mode].insn_code
		      == CODE_FOR_nothing))
		op0 = gen_binary (AND, tmode,
				  gen_lowpart_for_combine (tmode,
							   XEXP (op0, 0)),
				  gen_lowpart_for_combine (tmode,
							   XEXP (op0, 1)));

-- that should be and_optab, I think.

zw