Applied, thanks!
On Jan 15, 2007, at 9:09 AM, Duncan Sands wrote:
> EXACT_DIV_EXPR can be used on signed operands, so it is wrong to
> always
> turn it into UDiv. Since EXACT_DIV_EXPR always gives the same
> result as
> TRUNC_DIV_EXPR (it exists in gcc because it might give that result
> f
EXACT_DIV_EXPR can be used on signed operands, so it is wrong to always
turn it into UDiv. Since EXACT_DIV_EXPR always gives the same result as
TRUNC_DIV_EXPR (it exists in gcc because it might give that result faster
on some targets, not because it gives a different result), it is pointless
to di
