[Bug c/104510] [9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE: 'verify_gimple' failed: mismatching comparison operand types in verify_gimple_in_seq()

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104510

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Known to fail|                            |5.1.0
            Summary|ICE: 'verify_gimple'        |[9/10/11/12 Regression]
                   |failed: mismatching         |ICE: 'verify_gimple'
                   |comparison operand types in |failed: mismatching
                   |verify_gimple_in_seq()      |comparison operand types in
                   |                            |verify_gimple_in_seq()
      Known to work|                            |4.9.0, 4.9.4
   Target Milestone|---                         |9.5

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
This is a regression from GCC 4.9.0 which produced the correct trees even:


In GCC 5+:
  return (_Decimal32) f < d;


While in GCC 4.9.x:
  return (_Decimal64) f < (_Decimal64) d;