------- Comment #4 from majbrock at dse dot nl 2010-07-29 12:41 -------
Andreas said:
>> That does not change the fact that vus*vus can be assumed to be non-negative.
And then this bug was closed again.
So because one part of my report is dismissed you also dismiss the other part?
I already confirmed that you can choose to assume vus*vus to be non-negative.
But still I sustain that vus should read TWICE and it isn't. And thus I
conclude that its volatileness is lost.
Before you close it again can you please explain to me on what grounds vus
should not be read twice?
--
majbrock at dse dot nl changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45126
