------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-14
19:50 -------
(In reply to comment #4)
> Then either the semantic definition of the middle-end's w = (x ? y : z) needs
> to preserve y : z types,
> or it can not be considered equilvelent to if(x){ w = y; w = z;}, it would
> seem?
The middle-end here has nothing to do with it, this is all C/C++ standard
behavior and nothing else.
look the C standard does not talk about "=?:" but only the types of ?: and =
separately. unsigned is
higher in the promotion than signed int which is where the warning comes from
and the type of the
whole expression (a?i:j) is unsigned because that the lowest type which both
can be promoted to.
then there is an explicate cast from unsigned to int because we are assigning
to an int.
This again has nothing to do with the middle-end and just the rules in C/C++ of
how to deal with the
different type objects in the "?:".
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19437
