Re: c/8681: Generates unneeded test

Re: c/8681: Generates unneeded test

[Christian Ehrhardt]

The following reply was made to PR c/8681; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: "Christian Ehrhardt" <ehrhardt@mathematik.uni-ulm.de>
To: rf13@inf.tu-dresden.de, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org,
  gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org
Cc:  
Subject: Re: c/8681: Generates unneeded test
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:44:04 +0100

 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=8681
 
 Did this ever work? It DOESN'T for me with: 2.95.2, 3.2, 3.2.1, 3.3.
 This should be reclassified as change request. I can confirm that the
 compiler doesn't do an optimization that looks valid to me.
 
    regards  Christian
 
 -- 
 THAT'S ALL FOLKS!

Re: c/8681: Generates unneeded test

[bangerth]

Synopsis: Generates unneeded test

State-Changed-From-To: open->analyzed
State-Changed-By: bangerth
State-Changed-When: Sat Dec 21 10:49:19 2002
State-Changed-Why:
    Christian already confirmed this.

http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=8681

Re: c/8681: Generates unneeded test

[Raimar Falke]

The following reply was made to PR c/8681; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Raimar Falke <rf13@inf.tu-dresden.de>
To: Christian Ehrhardt <ehrhardt@mathematik.uni-ulm.de>
Cc: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org,
   nobody@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: c/8681: Generates unneeded test
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 17:18:05 +0100

 On Mon, Dec 02, 2002 at 03:44:04PM +0100, Christian Ehrhardt wrote:
 > 
 > http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=8681
 
 > Did this ever work? It DOESN'T for me with: 2.95.2, 3.2, 3.2.1, 3.3.
 
 If you mean with "worked" that it had omitted the test in the past: I
 don't know. It is a new issue for me which I think gcc should
 optimize.
 
 I have also tested intel compiler 6.0 and 7.0 and both don't do the
 optimization. The sun compiler (Sun WorkShop 6 update 2 C 5.3) however
 will do the optimization if -depend is given.
 
 > This should be reclassified as change request. I can confirm that
 > the compiler doesn't do an optimization that looks valid to me.
 
 	Raimar
 
 -- 
  email: rf13@inf.tu-dresden.de
   The trick is to keep breathing.