From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7708 invoked by alias); 21 Dec 2002 00:36:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 7694 invoked by uid 71); 21 Dec 2002 00:36:01 -0000 Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 16:36:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20021221003601.7693.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) Subject: Re: optimization/7799: [3.2/3.3 regression] Loop bug with optimization flag -Os in gcc Reply-To: dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg01132.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR optimization/7799; it has been noted by GNATS. From: dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) To: amylaar@onetel.net.uk, segher@koffie.nl Cc: ehrhardt@mathematik.uni-ulm.de, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, nejataydin@superonline.com Subject: Re: optimization/7799: [3.2/3.3 regression] Loop bug with optimization flag -Os in gcc Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 19:25:45 -0500 (EST) > It can't wrap around there, but if pointers are signed, it might straddle 0 > nonetheless. This requires, of course, for an aligned start address > that the address 0 is not the same as NULL, which AFAICR is something gcc > doesn't currently support. Note that addresses *are* considered signed on the INMOS Transputer as a proof of existence :-)