--- Comment #13 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-01 16:53 ---
4.2.3 is being released now, changing milestones of open bugs to 4.2.4.
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.2.1 |4.2.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31130
--- Comment #11 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-14 22:27
---
Will not be fixed in 4.2.0; retargeting at 4.2.1.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-30 19:51
---
I think this probably qualifies as a regression, given Stephen's comment #9,
but not an important one. With all of GCC's optimization options, if we start
worrying about regressions for things outside the {-O0,
--- Comment #9 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-28 09:56 ---
Re. comment #8, I have to disagree. Add some flag to disable some optimization
(DOM iiuc) and you do have a code generation regression.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31130
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-28 01:41 ---
This also happens on the 4.2 branch.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from ian at airs dot com 2007-04-28 05:26 ---
I don't see why this PR should count as a regression, since there is no
regression in the generated code. There is only a change in VRP behaviour.
The generated code is the same. This PR is only going to be really
