avt77 added a comment. >> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D44559#1040799, @rjmccall wrote: >> >>> I think we're correct not to warn here and that GCC/ICC are being noisy. >>> The existence of a temporary promotion to a wider type doesn't justify >>> warning on arithmetic between two operands that are the same size as the >>> ultimate result. It is totally fair for users to think of this operation >>> as being "closed" on the original type. >> >> >> Could you please clarify, are you saying that PR35409 >> <https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35409> is not a bug, and clang should >> continue to not warn in those cases? > > Correct.
Does it mean we should abandon this revision? On the other hand it's a real bug, isn't it? Repository: rC Clang https://reviews.llvm.org/D44559 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
