--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-23 15:17 ---
Mark as a dup of bug 25329.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 25329 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-23 15:17 ---
Reopening to ...
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Statu
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-23 15:15 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> I see your point, but I still think there's a bug. Let me change the code
> slightly:
The code is still undefined, as you are comparing an overflowed variable to
something.
-x is still un
--- Comment #6 from rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-23 15:14
---
Pinskia is right, and this is just as undefined as your previous example
(negating INT_MIN is just undefined, however you do it). All you've done is
obfuscated things a bit more.
--
rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #5 from simonmar at microsoft dot com 2006-03-23 15:10 ---
I see your point, but I still think there's a bug. Let me change the code
slightly:
#include
#include
void f(int x) {
long y;
if (x < 0) {
y = -x;
if (y > 0) {
printf("%d\n",y)
