From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30113 invoked by alias); 8 Apr 2004 23:36:46 -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 30091 invoked by uid 48); 8 Apr 2004 23:36:46 -0000 Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2004 23:36:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20040408233646.30090.qmail@sources.redhat.com> From: "dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20040127051055.13875.dann@godzilla.ics.uci.edu> References: <20040127051055.13875.dann@godzilla.ics.uci.edu> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug optimization/13875] [tree-ssa] missed jump thread optimization on the tree-level X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2004-04/txt/msg00807.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From dann at godzilla dot ics dot uci dot edu 2004-04-08 23:36 ------- > What's strange about them? The first is testing if T.3219 != 0 and the second > is testing of T.3219 != 2. They're rendered kind-of funny in the pretty > printer, but they appear to be correct to me. I was not sure if those tests are just rendered funny by the pretty printer or if it's something that implies that 2 comparisons are going to be performed for each "if". Other similar tests are not rendered that way, so maybe that is what was confusing for me. > Maybe if you provided more details about what you mean by "look strange", > we could look further into the potential problem. Sorry for being so terse. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13875