From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23268 invoked by alias); 12 May 2014 16:06:12 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 23198 invoked by uid 48); 12 May 2014 16:06:04 -0000 From: "swarren at nvidia dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug target/61131] [4.8 regression] ARM -Os: incorrect code generation Date: Mon, 12 May 2014 16:06:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: target X-Bugzilla-Version: unknown X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: swarren at nvidia dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED 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: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2014-05/txt/msg01045.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61131 --- Comment #3 from Stephen Warren --- This certainly violates the principle of least-surprise... Once i==2, "p->fd[i] >= 0" is certainly undefined. Surely "undefined && false" is false though, since "anything && false" is false; short-circuit evaluation should surely only apply if "anything" was known to be false, and presumably "undefined" isn't known to be false. Or is the definition of undefined such that it propagates through the entire expression irrespective of the expression's logic? I suppose that could be the case, but it's certainly not the most useful definition of undefined:-)