On 06/13/2018 05:18 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 11:42 AM Aldy Hernandez <al...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Howdy.
>>
>> Am I missing something or are these two sets identical?
>>
>>> /* Get the lower and upper bounds of the type. */
>>> if (TYPE_OVERFLOW_WRAPS (expr_type))
>>> {
>>> type_min = wi::min_value (prec, sgn);
>>> type_max = wi::max_value (prec, sgn);
>>> }
>>> else
>>> {
>>> type_min = wi::to_wide (vrp_val_min (expr_type));
>>> type_max = wi::to_wide (vrp_val_max (expr_type));
>>> }
>>
>> Isn't wi::to_wide(TYPE_MIN/MAX_VALUE) the same as wi::min/max_value, or
>> is there some weird language (*cough ada*) subtlety I'm missing?
>
> It might have subtle differences for -fstrict-enums or other language specific
> types where the legal value-range doesn't cover all of the types precision.
>
> I think you can safely use the wi::max/min_value variant and IMHO
> vrp_val_min/max should use wi::min/max_value as well (well, it returns
> a tree so better not re-create that all the time).
Or even C++ perhaps where an enum object can take on values outside the
enum.
Jeff
