From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23617 invoked by alias); 16 Mar 2004 18:32:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 23564 invoked from network); 16 Mar 2004 18:32:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com) (66.187.237.200) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 16 Mar 2004 18:32:50 -0000 Received: from frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i2GIWoIS012417; Tue, 16 Mar 2004 10:32:50 -0800 Received: (from rth@localhost) by frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i2GIWoRP012415; Tue, 16 Mar 2004 10:32:50 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com: rth set sender to rth@redhat.com using -f Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 18:32:00 -0000 From: Richard Henderson To: Robert Dewar Cc: alexr@spies.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [lno] [RFC] if-conversion and auto vectorizer Message-ID: <20040316183250.GA12315@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: Richard Henderson , Robert Dewar , alexr@spies.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org References: <20040316122702.393DEF2DC2@nile.gnat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040316122702.393DEF2DC2@nile.gnat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-SW-Source: 2004-03/txt/msg00840.txt.bz2 On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 07:27:02AM -0500, Robert Dewar wrote: > I don't understand the argument for C89. Why prevent a useful > optimization in order to enable incorrect code that just happens > to work to keep working. For the same reasons that we preserve a set of rules that are beyond C89 such that it's possible to write kernels. r~