[Bug tree-optimization/92233] missed optimisation for multiplication when it's known that at least one of the arguments is 0

2020-04-18 Thread law at redhat dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92233 Jeffrey A. Law changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at redhat dot com --- Comment #3 fr

[Bug tree-optimization/92233] missed optimisation for multiplication when it's known that at least one of the arguments is 0

2019-10-28 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92233 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/92233] missed optimisation for multiplication when it's known that at least one of the arguments is 0

2019-10-26 Thread glisse at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92233 --- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse --- (llvm doesn't do it either) Would some kind of threading be the most natural way to handle this? If the compiler duplicates the code as if (a==0) return a*b; else if (b==0) return a*b; then it becomes easy to

[Bug tree-optimization/92233] missed optimisation for multiplication when it's known that at least one of the arguments is 0

2019-10-25 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92233 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org Sev