On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 10:56:52AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 10/21/13 09:13, Marek Polacek wrote:
> >In this PR (well, in the first testcase in it), the problem was that
> >fold_range_test got op0 and op1 of a COMPLEX_TYPE, subsequent call
> >of make_range then failed because it wants to create an integer constant
> >using build_int_cst - and that can't handle COMPLEX_TYPE. Also,
> >we can't just compare complex numbers, so I think it's sane to bail out
> >if fold_range_test isn't dealing with integer types...
> >
> >I didn't want to put the check between the declarations, so the
> >make_range calls were moved slightly below.
> >
> >Regtested/bootstrapped on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
> >
> >2013-10-21 Marek Polacek <pola...@redhat.com>
> >
> > PR middle-end/58809
> > * fold-const.c (fold_range_test): Return 0 if the type is not
> > an integral type.
> >testsuite/
> > * gcc.dg/gomp/pr58809.c: New test.
> For exceedingly annoying reasons BOOLEAN_TYPE is not considered an
> integral type. You might consider letting fold_range_test do it's
> thing on BOOLEAN_TYPEs, though I'd be surprised if that matters in
> practice.
Really? In tree.h I can see
#define INTEGRAL_TYPE_P(TYPE) \
(TREE_CODE (TYPE) == ENUMERAL_TYPE \
|| TREE_CODE (TYPE) == BOOLEAN_TYPE \
|| TREE_CODE (TYPE) == INTEGER_TYPE)
> Your call -- fine as-is or you can let BOOLEAN_TYPEs through with a
> pre-approved patch.
...so I'm keeping the patch as-is. Thanks,
Marek
