From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id 5800D3858C24; Sat, 16 Mar 2024 11:26:44 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 5800D3858C24
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1710588404;
	bh=blnRB4NKEDI+Dt2xwI9QEloCPzzmCI5/OOvAjWZ8j28=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=AoHyIXqdsSIf07ZySUCbfBt5vApaOvjSPYOgsCtKq+vRTaex6fHRqlbIbGyap4Weh
	 l2vmzJnKUlh7i9+W3hs0QuTEQ7SILsWADH9N4iCcDKcidKIBMFvCJ2MpLNvsuysPWY
	 E4C8GhV9sAz48kciuw3MLSsDzjzRYTWliYiph7/A=
From: "xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/114363] inconsistent optimization of
 pow(x,2)+pow(y,2)
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2024 11:26:43 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: tree-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Version: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: INVALID
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: resolution cc bug_status
Message-ID: <bug-114363-4-reqziPThlo@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-114363-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-114363-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D114363

Xi Ruoyao <xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Resolution|---                         |INVALID
                 CC|                            |xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |RESOLVED

--- Comment #2 from Xi Ruoyao <xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Harald van Dijk from comment #1)
> This is, I believe, correct. Before C++11, calling std::pow with float and
> int arguments, it returned a float. As of C++11, it returns a double.
>=20
> If the result of pow(x,2) is immediately converted to float, then it is a
> valid optimisation to convert it to x*x: that is guaranteed to produce the
> exact same result. But if it isn't, then converting to x*x loses accuracy
> and alters the result.

Thus invalid.

> You can call std::powf instead of std::pow to avoid the promotion to doub=
le.

Or add -std=3Dc++98.=