On 2015.08.13 at 15:40 +0200, Marek Polacek wrote: > On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 01:11:53PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > > Rather ubsan should not complain about implementation defined behavior (or > > should separate those cases out with a different switch compared to > > undefined > > behavior). > > I think ubsan doesn't complain about implementation-defined behavior. It > seems > to me that in this thread it only (rightfully) complained about left-shifting > of > negative value.
There are two issues in the same location: 1) gcc/hwint.h:250:19: runtime error: left shift of 8589934588 by 32 places cannot be represented in type 'long int' 2) left-shifting of negative values -- Markus
