http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55616
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-01-31 10:47:55 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > (In reply to comment #3) > > I don't see anything bogus on the warning, it is useful to inform the > > developer > > about potentially unintended optimization removing some conditional. > > Neither programmer wrote (X + c) < X, this pattern does not occur in Okular > nor > Qt. I'm open to labeling the warning as "very difficult to diagnose" or > "unhelpful" in these cases, and not "bogus". But I think it's a problem > because it distracts from the real problems this warning intends to catch. Well, but the possible overflow is present in the literal 'number_of_elements_in_path+100'. Yes, hard to track the warning down to that possible issue, but I don't think we can improve much on that front.
