Re: [RFA][PATCH][PR tree-optimization/45685]

[Jeff Law]

On 12/11/13 08:11, Richard Biener wrote:
Bah.  That was supposed to be HONOR_SIGNED_ZEROS.  Which as far as I can
tell is a property of the value being tested.

No, it's

invert_tree_comparison (enum tree_code code, bool honor_nans)

so indeed HONOR_NANS.  And yes, on a conditional argument
(it can be a FP comparison but a integer negate).
I realized I was wrong after I went downstairs for breakfast :-)  Ignore 
my last message WRT HONOR_NANs and HONOR_SIGNED_ZEROs.

Jeff