https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82494
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed| |2017-10-09 Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> --- I think there's a dup somewhere. We've discussed that typedef int *lambda_vector; is simply too optimistic. The machinery assumes this is an arbitrary precision integer ;) A optimistic "fix" would be to make it int64_t, probably catching most (if not all) practical cases (all overflows are possibly wrong-code!). A real fix would involve either using gmp (ugh) or making a lot of routines failable that are not right now plus using overflow-detecting math (and fail).