From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-prs-return-17123-listarch-gcc-prs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 7033 invoked by alias); 10 Apr 2002 15:06:01 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-prs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 7014 invoked by uid 71); 10 Apr 2002 15:06:01 -0000
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 08:06:00 -0000
Message-ID: <20020410150601.7011.qmail@sources.redhat.com>
To: echristo@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org,
From: Reichelt <reichelt@igpm.rwth-aachen.de>
Subject: Re: optimization/1762: treatment of NaNs violates IEEE 754
Reply-To: Reichelt <reichelt@igpm.rwth-aachen.de>
X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg00586.txt.bz2
List-Id: <gcc-prs.sourceware.org>

The following reply was made to PR optimization/1762; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Reichelt <reichelt@igpm.rwth-aachen.de>
To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, echristo@gcc.gnu.org
Cc:  
Subject: Re: optimization/1762: treatment of NaNs violates IEEE 754
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 17:25:51 +0200

 Maybe the PR can be closed, since the problem doesn't arise with
 recent 3.1 snapshots.
 
 Maybe a testcase should be added to the regression tests because
 the bug already vanished earlier, but reappeared after some time
 so that the PR had to be reopened.
 
 Greetings,
 Volker Reichelt
 
 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=1762