From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31341 invoked by alias); 12 Jan 2004 15:09:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 31330 invoked by uid 48); 12 Jan 2004 15:09:23 -0000 Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 15:09:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20040112150923.31329.qmail@sources.redhat.com> From: "giovannibajo at libero dot it" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20030926105501.12419.aph@gcc.gnu.org> References: <20030926105501.12419.aph@gcc.gnu.org> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug optimization/12419] [3.3/3.4 Regression] Performace regression: poor optimization of const memory X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2004-01/txt/msg01224.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2004-01-12 15:09 ------- pessimizes-code is *very* important especially when it's a regression. Our releases are not supposed to generate slower code. Bumping priority up again. -- What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Severity|normal |critical http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12419