On 28.05.2012 16:40, Ángel González wrote: > On 28/05/12 14:35, Johannes Bauer wrote: >> So "pure" would be the perfect fit: Global memory is read but not >> modified (which is also asserted by passing the arguments as "const"). >> Why is gcc then not doing the optimization that I'd want it to perform? > I have no idea. > I wondered if it feared fprintf changing global variables on which > intcmp() depended, > so I modified it to create the following program, where there is no > side-effect. > But it still exhibits the same behavior (intcmp called 100 times if > pure, 1 if const). Thank you for trying it out... good to get confirmation that this isn't just the case with my arch/gcc combination. Would you mind sharing which platform/gcc version you've tried it out with? Best regards, Johannes
