[Bug c++/105164] new warning in clang, missing in gcc: -Wbitwise-instead-of-logical

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

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105164

Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Assignee|marxin at gcc dot gnu.org          |unassigned at gcc dot 
gnu.org
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |NEW

--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Well, I doubt the warning is much useful.

There are situations where we can't use short-circuit evaluation:

gcc/c-family/c-attribs.cc:2384:
  else if (TREE_CODE (decl) == FUNCTION_DECL
           && (((curalign = DECL_ALIGN (decl)) > bitalign)
               | ((lastalign = DECL_ALIGN (last_decl)) > bitalign)))

or we want to quickly and flags of a struct:

  gcc_checking_assert (!IDENTIFIER_KIND_BIT_2 (id)
                       & !IDENTIFIER_KIND_BIT_1 (id)
                       & !IDENTIFIER_KIND_BIT_0 (id));

Note a different code is generated for situations like:

return foo() && bar() && baz ();

and

return foo() & bar() & baz ();

So I don't think we should change the code based on the warnings.