[Bug tree-optimization/55559] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Marshalling double through union with inlines, incorrect behavior with -O2

2012-12-03 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Known to work|

[Bug tree-optimization/55559] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Marshalling double through union with inlines, incorrect behavior with -O2

2012-12-03 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|wrong-code | Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug tree-optimization/55559] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Marshalling double through union with inlines, incorrect behavior with -O2

2012-12-03 Thread paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9 --- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini 2012-12-03 12:51:45 UTC --- I knew that a PR using "marshalling" couldn't be right ;)

[Bug tree-optimization/55559] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Marshalling double through union with inlines, incorrect behavior with -O2

2012-12-03 Thread mpreda at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9 --- Comment #7 from Mihai Preda 2012-12-03 22:13:03 UTC --- Thanks, I didn't realize that (unsigned)-1.0 is undefined. For the behavior I was expecting it's enough to use an intermediary cast through int, e.g. (unsigned)(int)-1.0. It

[Bug tree-optimization/55559] [4.6/4.7/4.8 Regression] Marshalling double through union with inlines, incorrect behavior with -O2

2012-12-04 Thread rguenther at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9 --- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de 2012-12-04 09:02:00 UTC --- On Mon, 3 Dec 2012, mpreda at gmail dot com wrote: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9 > > --- Comment #7 from Mihai Preda 2012-12-03 22:13:0