lebedev.ri added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaChecking.cpp:8592
+ bool BadR = !RType->isIntegerType() || RType->isSignedIntegerType() ||
+ RHS->isKnownToHaveBooleanValue();
+
----------------
rjmccall wrote:
> Please extract a function which computes this for an Expr* and then call it
> as part of the conditions below, e.g.:
>
> if (op == BO_LT && isNonBooleanUnsignedValue(E->getLHS()) && IsZero(S,
> E->getRHS()))
Yes, that is indeed a better way :)
================
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaChecking.cpp:8879
+ if (IsComparisonConstant)
return AnalyzeImpConvsInComparison(S, E);
----------------
rjmccall wrote:
> Part of the purpose of checking for signed comparisons up here is to avoid
> unnecessarily computing ranges for the operands when we aren't going to use
> them. That's still something we want to avoid. I think you just need to
> call CheckTrivialUnsignedComparison in this fallback case, at least when the
> comparison is not constant.
>
> You should also rename CheckTrivialUnsignedComparison to something like
> CheckTautologicalComparison.
Ok, i must admit that i understand the idea to have minimal overhead. But i
don't really follow the code in here :)
This seems to work, and `check-clang-sema`+`check-clang-semacxx`+stage2 still
pass.
Is this obviously-wrong / some testcase is missing?
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37565
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
