https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114631
--- Comment #5 from Ganton ---
Thanks for the detailed information, Andrew!
If anybody reads this bug report: The reported problems are seen using GCC
13.2.0 and `-O2`, but not using `-O1` nor `-O0`.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114631
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Ganton from comment #3)
> When that page (https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-33026) was written,
> the behavior of GCC was not like the described in this bug report (because
> the `for (doub
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114631
--- Comment #3 from Ganton ---
Note: That code was initially aimed for `decimal32` testing
(https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-33026) because using `decimal32` instead
of `double`... the `for (doub = [...]` loop is not infinite.
When that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114631
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114631
--- Comment #1 from Ganton ---
Maybe this can be useful: "if we remove the `std::cout << doub << " ";` line...
the program stops"... does that happen because an "aggressive"(?樂) optimization
is made (without warning the user)?
If we add a
