On 05/21/2013 02:23 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 5:51 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
As I believe I pointed out in a follow-up message, 254.gap is depending on
signed overflow semantics.
This patch avoids eliminating a cast feeding a conditional when the
SSA_NAME's range has overflow
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 5:51 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> As I believe I pointed out in a follow-up message, 254.gap is depending on
> signed overflow semantics.
>
> This patch avoids eliminating a cast feeding a conditional when the
> SSA_NAME's range has overflowed unless -fstrict-overflow is in effect
As I believe I pointed out in a follow-up message, 254.gap is depending
on signed overflow semantics.
This patch avoids eliminating a cast feeding a conditional when the
SSA_NAME's range has overflowed unless -fstrict-overflow is in effect.
Thus 254.gap should be building with -fno-strict-overf
