On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 10:57 AM, Marek Polacek <pola...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 10:53:01AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 3:39 PM, Marek Polacek <pola...@redhat.com> wrote: >> > On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 11:17:37AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: >> >> On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 7:43 PM, Marek Polacek <pola...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> > The -Wlogical-not-parentheses deliberately doesn't warn when the RHS has >> >> > boolean type. But since in C the type of a comparison is int, we need >> >> > to check for tcc_comparison, too. >> >> > >> >> > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and ppc64le-redhat-linux, ok for >> >> > trunk? >> >> >> >> What about using truth_value_p ()? That also includes && and || (just >> >> in case those >> >> do not have boolean type). >> > >> > You're right that I should also handle || and && (done in this patch). >> > But I >> > can't use truth_value_p because we want to warn for e.g. "!a == (a & b)". >> >> But a & b isn't truth_value_p. a && b is. Do we want to warn about >> !a == (a && b)? > > We don't want to warn about !a == (a && b), I think. But truth_value_p > returns > true for both TRUTH_AND_EXPR and TRUTH_ANDIF_EXPR. I find that confusing, and > I can't use it in the current form because of that.
Note that a & b would be BIT_AND_EXPR, TRUTH_AND_EXPR is just non-short-circuiting && Richard. > Marek
