From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1BB9C38D0EAB for ; Tue, 4 Jun 2024 17:48:11 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 1BB9C38D0EAB Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 1BB9C38D0EAB Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1717523292; cv=none; b=abrwqzTx0CKLWkQIQnOlUj18YmArQVTcmov+DlG4vmgluKu23V2tX1VkUzuMqRvXgd/8Bviu+8UTSIvTMwRsj0PLzkbH+vcqkyW+ZcgOLmbJOcvVBazS0pp2wbaWcPCArd3Zxs7QK59kytRUPoWSRlgGP1K8RXEznRJB/DC7zNk= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1717523292; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Tc9gb4tRfmGD50AeVw8UI/S/JzSnf8hAJpZ4io1Sy5Y=; h=DKIM-Signature:Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=qVLFA/pV2th+SxuSn5TLolQqxn3KeinCGHlOFATIJiWXCfPProo3FBLSkQXNcVIuxp5Umx+8uu6UKAGmVoYcmXyn/i41Iuk0pDmYBDDytzywTk28iReiZBnOe65sc5XAVNzumcgc5DrUgeU7UqwoMwOYkouYl5wblbkfFTLjtU0= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1717523290; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=0P2pZYfmUFAFy9rxO8nv16cXpIsZWRsPp1d/4KYGpA0=; b=CHBEYqKJ01J5WHkQcCGCmHMDVn90EMdkhR4ZWhG2rf3CEK2xE+Jt2LQ/2tYd7+VeXLkRT3 dfOqAIWINbKeu4wRaVWmN6GXECArGSWj+qz+f7E2pWV0jQZl7VaXIiRIZ1f0Ur1gzAXng6 T1tft+e6IBcDguYC5Oom27naROZLGUM= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-449-bR1evWi8MqiT_JOf-jo9oA-1; Tue, 04 Jun 2024 13:48:09 -0400 X-MC-Unique: bR1evWi8MqiT_JOf-jo9oA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BDA88185B920; Tue, 4 Jun 2024 17:48:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (unknown [10.45.224.7]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 33823202A435; Tue, 4 Jun 2024 17:48:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.17.1/8.17.1) with ESMTPS id 454Hm58Z1821634 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 4 Jun 2024 19:48:06 +0200 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.17.1/8.17.1/Submit) id 454Hm5tN1821633; Tue, 4 Jun 2024 19:48:05 +0200 Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 19:48:05 +0200 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Michael Matz Cc: Richard Biener , Georg-Johann Lay , Paul Koning , gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: How to avoid some built-in expansions in gcc? Message-ID: Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <28f35346-2f3f-ead3-0150-7fc816d20651@suse.de> <2e3fd315-fd89-10ad-f375-cdf4d032fbe4@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <2e3fd315-fd89-10ad-f375-cdf4d032fbe4@suse.de> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.11.54.4 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Tue, Jun 04, 2024 at 07:43:40PM +0200, Michael Matz via Gcc wrote: > (Well, and without reverse-recognition of isfinite-like idioms in the > sources. That's orthogonal as well.) Why? If isfinite is better done by a libcall, why isn't isfinite-like idiom also better done as a libcall? Jakub