--- Comment #22 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2006-08-18 16:16 ---
patch withdrawn, I'll wait for pinskia's
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #21 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2006-08-17 08:16 ---
I'll see if I can construct a case where my patch fails (actually a newer one)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25500
--- Comment #20 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-07 15:35
---
(In reply to comment #19)
> This patchlet makes GCC use element-copy for struct FF:
You have to be careful when editing count_type_elements so that the elements of
a constructor that are not explict are zeroed.
--- Comment #19 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2006-08-07 07:59 ---
This patchlet makes GCC use element-copy for struct FF:
Index: expr.c
===
--- expr.c (revision 115990)
+++ expr.c (working copy)
@@ -4763,7 +4763,7
--- Comment #18 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2006-08-07 07:54 ---
One element, but with some additional complication because it is a vector.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25500
--- Comment #17 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-05 09:50
---
struct FF {
__m128 d;
.
}
Mine I have a patch for this I cannot believe I found this before. The patch
has been tested a bit at least in the local tree I have been playing out with.
SRA should use element b
--- Comment #16 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-25 02:33
---
Will not be fixed in 4.1.1; adjust target milestone to 4.1.2.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
