------- Additional Comments From rguenth at tat dot physik dot uni-tuebingen dot de 2005-08-11 17:43 ------- I'll do that. Though
+ /* If we don't have <NE_EXPR/NE_EXPR x INT_CST>, then we cannot + optimize this case. */ + if ((cond_code == NE_EXPR || cond_code == EQ_EXPR) + && TREE_CODE (TREE_OPERAND (cond, 1)) != INTEGER_CST) + continue; should probably read + /* If we don't have <NE_EXPR/EQ_EXPR x INT_CST>, then we cannot + optimize this case. */ + if (!((cond_code == NE_EXPR || cond_code == EQ_EXPR) + && TREE_CODE (TREE_OPERAND (cond, 1)) == INTEGER_CST)) + continue; because else we might get f.i. LE_EXPR passing through? Maybe the little context confuses me here, though. I'll have a look before testing. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23326
