--- Comment #8 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-22 11:45 ---
I don't think anyone is interested in fixing this - WONTFIX.
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from law at redhat dot com 2007-03-29 23:18 ---
Subject: Re: Missed jump threading/bypassing
optimization with loop and % (or ands)
IMHO, this PR should simply be closed.
This is a case where aggressive threading is going to explode codesize
with marginal
--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2005-05-02 16:46 ---
Subject: Re: Missed jump threading/bypassing
optimization with loop and % (or ands)
On Sun, 2005-05-01 at 16:29 +, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-01
16:29 ---
We now get:
main ()
{
int i.8;
int i;
bb 0:
Invalid sum of outgoing probabilities 0.0%
i = 0;
i.8 = i + 1;
Invalid sum of outgoing probabilities 98.9%
L0:;
if ((i.8 1) != 0) goto L1; else goto
--- Additional Comments From law at redhat dot com 2005-02-14 20:35 ---
Actually, if the jump threader code really did its job right it would just
emit 45 calls to puts (hello) since we've got a series of cascading jump
threads here.
As it stands now, the first DOM pass threads the
