> On Jan 10, 2025, at 15:34, Jeff Law <jeffreya...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On 1/9/25 1:39 PM, Qing Zhao wrote: >>> On Jan 9, 2025, at 14:10, Jeff Law <jeffreya...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On 1/9/25 10:48 AM, Qing Zhao wrote: >>> >>>>> >>>>> I think Jeff's patch is not reasonable since it boils down to not diagnose >>>>> -Warray-bounds but instead remove those stmts. >>>> If these stmts are dead-code that are generated by compiler optimization >>>> (NOT from source code), >>>> removing them before diagnosis is correct. (To avoid false positive >>>> warnings). >>> But I don't think we generally know if the problematic statements came from >>> user code or were generated by the compiler. >> To help the compiler catches real problems in the source code and avoid >> false positive warnings introduced by the compiler transformation, we might >> need to add flags in the IR to distinguish this? > This sounds like a path lined with peril -- I just don't see that we're > likely to keep this data consistent through the various transformations. You are right, it’s hard to keep such flag correctly through the compiler transformations. :)
Qomg > > Jeff
