On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 8:20 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Sep 2016, Patrick Palka wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 1:58 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, 19 Aug 2016, Patrick Palka wrote:
>>>
On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 7:30 PM, Patrick Palka
wrote:
>
>
> integer
On Mon, 19 Sep 2016, Patrick Palka wrote:
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 1:58 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Fri, 19 Aug 2016, Patrick Palka wrote:
On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 7:30 PM, Patrick Palka
wrote:
integer_nonzerop() currently unconditionally returns false for a
VECTOR_CST argument. This is conf
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 1:58 AM, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Aug 2016, Patrick Palka wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 7:30 PM, Patrick Palka
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> integer_nonzerop() currently unconditionally returns false for a
>>> VECTOR_CST argument. This is confusing because one would expe
On Fri, 19 Aug 2016, Patrick Palka wrote:
On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 7:30 PM, Patrick Palka wrote:
integer_nonzerop() currently unconditionally returns false for a
VECTOR_CST argument. This is confusing because one would expect that
integer_onep(x) => integer_nonzerop(x) for all x but that is cu
On 08/19/2016 05:30 PM, Patrick Palka wrote:
integer_nonzerop() currently unconditionally returns false for a
VECTOR_CST argument. This is confusing because one would expect that
integer_onep(x) => integer_nonzerop(x) for all x but that is currently
not the case. For a VECTOR_CST of all ones i.
On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 9:10 AM, Richard Biener
wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 1:38 AM, Patrick Palka wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 7:30 PM, Patrick Palka wrote:
>>> integer_nonzerop() currently unconditionally returns false for a
>>> VECTOR_CST argument. This is confusing because one wou
On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 1:38 AM, Patrick Palka wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 7:30 PM, Patrick Palka wrote:
>> integer_nonzerop() currently unconditionally returns false for a
>> VECTOR_CST argument. This is confusing because one would expect that
>> integer_onep(x) => integer_nonzerop(x) for
On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 7:30 PM, Patrick Palka wrote:
> integer_nonzerop() currently unconditionally returns false for a
> VECTOR_CST argument. This is confusing because one would expect that
> integer_onep(x) => integer_nonzerop(x) for all x but that is currently
> not the case. For a VECTOR_CS
integer_nonzerop() currently unconditionally returns false for a
VECTOR_CST argument. This is confusing because one would expect that
integer_onep(x) => integer_nonzerop(x) for all x but that is currently
not the case. For a VECTOR_CST of all ones i.e. {1,1,1,1},
integer_onep() returns true but i
