Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!cornell!rochester!udel!burdvax!sdcrdcf!trwrb!desint!geoff
From: geoff@desint.UUCP (Geoff Kuenning)
Newsgroups: comp.sources.bugs
Subject: Re: possible bugs in 1.13 gcc
Message-ID: <1656@desint.UUCP>
Date: 19 Dec 87 21:48:01 GMT
References: <3299@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu>
Reply-To: geoff@desint.UUCP (Geoff Kuenning)
Organization: Interrupt Technology Corp., Manhattan Beach, CA
Lines: 16

In article <3299@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> lvc@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Lawrence V. Cipriani) writes:

> Here are some possible bugs in 1.13 gcc.
> 	    if (shorts[7] | shorts[6] | shorts[5] | shorts[4])
> 
> which (isn't really a bug but) would be better written with ||
> instead of |.

Untrue.  The choice of the optimal operator depends on both the CPU
architecture and the actual data values.  On most CPU's (actually,
on every one I've worked on that had booleans at all) using || will
make the code take more space, and it will be slower if the first
nonzero value is in shorts[5] or shorts[4] (on many machines, it will
also be slower if only shorts[7] is zero).
-- 
	Geoff Kuenning   geoff@ITcorp.com   {uunet,trwrb}!desint!geoff