https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102078
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #6)
> I guess there are some machines where unsigned int is 64 bit.
Even if there are (not aware of any such target), 1U << index would be enough
for that. The cod
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102078
--- Comment #6 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #4)
> Full cppcheck error message is
>
> gcc/ada/affinity.c:59:19: error: Signed integer overflow for expression
> '1<
> I think cppcheck is worried if index run
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102078
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
index doesn't go to 32, just to 31.
And whether 1 << 31 or -1 << 31 etc. is or isn't UB heavily depends on the
language and standard version, C++20 and later accepts both, C89 and C++98 were
fuzzy, 1 << 31 i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102078
--- Comment #4 from David Binderman ---
Full cppcheck error message is
gcc/ada/affinity.c:59:19: error: Signed integer overflow for expression
'1<
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102078
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Actually no, it is in libada and built only for VxWorks, maybe it is built with
C rather than C++. In that case it would indeed be UB.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102078
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102078
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102078
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-08-26
Status|UNCONFIRME
