http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56899
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-04-10 09:29:43 UTC --- (In reply to comment #8) > That said, removing that hunk completely would remove it even for the case > where the type has defined overflow, shouldn't we remove it just for undefined > overflow (or, replace the addition/subtraction with undefined one)? Yes, that works (remove it for undefined overflow). Replacing it with defined overflow one, too, but I prefer to make extract_muldiv do less (it's a scary beast ...).
