https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57009
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #1)
> union A { double d; unsigned long long i; };
> bool f(double x){
> A a; a.d = x;
> unsigned long long inf = 0x7ff0000000000000;
> return (a.i & inf) != inf;
> }
>
> (I use != and not < in the example above because gcc insists on creating a
> new constant inf-1 and replacing <inf with <=inf-1)
I think the above issue is the same issue as mentioned in PR 95740.
I have not looked into the original comments yet but I think there might be a
dup of it somewhere too.
