--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
GCC target triplet|4.5.0 |
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0
http://gcc.gnu.o
--- Comment #8 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-06 11:37 ---
The issue is no longer present in trunk. Closing as fixed.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfi
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-10 20:34 ---
Oh I see it now:
/* If the comparison is being folded and the operand on the LHS
is being compared against a constant value that is outside of
the natural range of OP0's type, then the predica
--- Comment #6 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-10 20:30 ---
Subject: Re: Bogus warning from GCC
>> The warning is likely to come from tree-vrp.c.
> The only place which emits this warning is from c-common.c so I
> think someone needs to debug this a little bit. Place a breakp
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-10 20:17 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> The warning is likely to come from tree-vrp.c.
The only place which emits this warning is from c-common.c so I think someone
needs to debug this a little bit. Place a breakpoint on warnin
--- Comment #4 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-06 16:57 ---
Andrew, you're right, I got confused by the build_binary_op() which is present
both in ada/gcc-interface/utils2.c and c-typeck.c, and that the warning appears
as is in c-common.c.
The warning is likely to come from tree
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2008-08-06 15:46 ---
Subject: Re: Bogus warning from GCC
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 6, 2008, at 8:39, "sam at gcc dot gnu dot org" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
> --- Comment #2 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-06 15:39
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 6, 2008, at 8:39, "sam at gcc dot gnu dot org" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
--- Comment #2 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-06 15:39
---
The warning comes from a range check which is emitted by Gigi. The
backend
knows that this check is useles
--- Comment #2 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-06 15:39 ---
The warning comes from a range check which is emitted by Gigi. The backend
knows that this check is useless, and warns about it. As far as I can tell,
there is no way to suppress the warning in shorten_compare (c-common.
--- Comment #1 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-06 14:49 ---
(read "the line containing 'Val", not "'Pos")
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37038
11 matches
Mail list logo
