http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43772
--- Comment #19 from Marc Glisse <marc.glisse at normalesup dot org> 2012-04-28 22:16:55 UTC --- (In reply to comment #18) > I'm afraid that false positives would still be likely. > For example, suppose we're on a platform where > INT_MAX = LONG_MAX < INTMAX_MAX. Then: > > intmax_t i = (whatever); > if (INT_MAX < i && i <= LONG_MAX) > print ("i is in 'long' but not 'int' range"); Have you actually seen that? I would imagine the following to be more common: if(i<=INT_MAX) print("i is in 'int'"); else if(i<=LONG_MAX) ... > This sort of thing is fairly common in portable code, > and GCC shouldn't warn about it merely because > we're on a platform where the two tests cannot both > be true when INT_MAX == LONG_MAX. Well, can you define a set of circumstances where gcc could / should warn? a<i&&i<=a seems to be quite precisely what this warning is about. Or maybe a==INT_MAX (adapt depending on the type) should disable the warning, as a special case? Please also remember that we are not talking of having this warning by default, this is an isolated warning not even included in -Wall -Wextra.