On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 3:27 PM Aldy Hernandez <al...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 11/8/18 9:21 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 1:09 PM Aldy Hernandez <al...@redhat.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> All this nonsense:
> >>
> >> - rtype = get_range_info (t, &min, &max);
> >> - if (rtype == VR_RANGE)
> >> - {
> >> - if (wi::lt_p (max, w, TYPE_SIGN (TREE_TYPE (t))))
> >> - return true;
> >> - if (wi::lt_p (w, min, TYPE_SIGN (TREE_TYPE (t))))
> >> - return true;
> >> - }
> >> - else if (rtype == VR_ANTI_RANGE
> >> - && wi::le_p (min, w, TYPE_SIGN (TREE_TYPE (t)))
> >> - && wi::le_p (w, max, TYPE_SIGN (TREE_TYPE (t))))
> >>
> >> Replaced by an API like Kutulu intended.
> >>
> >> + get_range_info (t, vr);
> >> + if (!vr.may_contain_p (wide_int_to_tree (TREE_TYPE (t), w)))
> >>
> >> Ain't it grand?
> >
> > Well. The not-so-grand thing is that you possibly ggc-allocate
> > three INTEGER_CST nodes here.
>
> Hmmm... I'd really prefer to use a simple API call, instead of having to
> twiddle with the extremes manually. Ideally no one should be looking
> inside of a value_range.
>
> Do recommend another way of implementing may_contain_p ?
I think many places dealing with get_range_info () should instead
work on the (to be created...) 1:1 copy of value_range ontop of
wide-int-range instead.
So - can you add a wide_int_range class to wide-int-range.h
that implements the same (but with wide-ints rather than trees
obviously) API as value-range?
IIRC you once had sth like that to simpify arg passing to the
workers but otherwise without much functionality?
Richard.
> Aldy
>
> >
> > So, no ...?
> >
> > Shouldn't this instead use wide-int-range.h? (yeah, there's
> > the class-ification still missing there)
> >
> > Richard.
> >
> >> OK for trunk, depending on get_range_info changes of course?
> >>
> >> Aldy
