On 10/21/2011 12:20 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
+ || tree_int_cst_equal (maxindex, integer_minus_one_node))
Use integer_all_onesp instead. OK with that change.
Jason
On 10/21/2011 04:56 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
I think the fix for 35602 was wrong; instead of trying to suppress the
warning, we should avoid building expressions that trip it. In this
case, the problem is a type mismatch in build_vec_init between
maxindex/iterator (ptrdiff_type_node) and array
I think the fix for 35602 was wrong; instead of trying to suppress the
warning, we should avoid building expressions that trip it. In this
case, the problem is a type mismatch in build_vec_init between
maxindex/iterator (ptrdiff_type_node) and array_type_nelts_total
(sizetype). And indeed, co
Hi,
this one is a bit subtler. It's actually a regression due to the fix for
PR35602, which was about a bogus warning for:
struct c
{
~c();
c();
};
int
main()
{
c x[0UL][0UL] = // { dg-bogus "warning: conversion to .long unsigned
int. from .long int. may change the sign of the result"
