From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16002 invoked by alias); 2 Jun 2005 18:50:31 -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 15954 invoked by uid 48); 2 Jun 2005 18:50:22 -0000 Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2005 18:50:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20050602185022.15953.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20040819145911.17100.steinmtz@us.ibm.com> References: <20040819145911.17100.steinmtz@us.ibm.com> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/17100] Missed opportunity for value range optimization X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2005-06/txt/msg00271.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-02 18:50 ------- Fixed. Likely with http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-06/msg00127.html, but it may have been fixed earlier. The natural range for i_6 is computed as [0, 9] so this isn't something that was folded using range equivalences. -- What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17100