https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82103
--- Comment #6 from Jeffrey A. Law <law at redhat dot com> --- It should. It may not though because one the n != 0 test is removed, the resulting range of N is probably VR_VARYING rather than ~[0,0] at the call to memset. The former signifies we know nothing about the length and given how often that likely occurs in practice I suspect the warning code suppresses the warning in that case. The latter says we know the range is everything except 0. With that sliver of information the warnings kick in. It's a bit of speculation on my part, but it's informed speculation.
