"x*41" computes the same value as "x*31 + x*7 + x*3" and (when
compiled by gc) requires just one multiply instruction instead of
three.

Alternatively, the expression could be written as "(x<<2+x)<<3 + x" to
use shifts instead of multiplies (which is how GCC optimizes "x*41").
But gc currently emits suboptimal instructions for this expression
anyway (e.g., separate SHL+ADD instructions rather than LEA on
386/amd64). Also, if such an optimization was worthwhile, it would
seem better to implement it as part of gc's strength reduction logic.

Change-Id: I7156b793229d723bbc9a52aa9ed6111291335277
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/1830Reviewed-by: Minux Ma <minux@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Brad Fitzpatrick <bradfitz@golang.org>