https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103207
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103207
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Aldy Hernandez :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6c29c9d6a7d80ece7e08eb546ca4a1ba1430a9b3
commit r12-5274-g6c29c9d6a7d80ece7e08eb546ca4a1ba1430a9b3
Author: Aldy Hernandez
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103207
--- Comment #6 from Aldy Hernandez ---
Created attachment 51796
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51796&action=edit
patch in testing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103207
--- Comment #5 from Aldy Hernandez ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> Sure. (OVF) in the IL are meaningless, we do try to prune them but it still
> happens that they appear.
Ughh, you've mentioned this before. Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103207
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
Sure. (OVF) in the IL are meaningless, we do try to prune them but it still
happens that they appear.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103207
--- Comment #3 from Aldy Hernandez ---
That is, is the overflowed 0 allowed in the switch's case?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103207
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amacleod at redhat dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103207
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103207
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
