On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 3:14 PM Jeff Law wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2/20/25 12:52 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 11:29 PM Jeff Law wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> An interesting little bug. We're just emitting what appears to me to be
> >> a silly warning.
> >>
> >> By the time the array-bou
On 2/20/25 12:52 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 11:29 PM Jeff Law wrote:
An interesting little bug. We're just emitting what appears to me to be
a silly warning.
By the time the array-bounds checker runs we have this statement in the IL:
MEM[(int *)_42 + -4B] ={v
On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 11:29 PM Jeff Law wrote:
>
>
> An interesting little bug. We're just emitting what appears to me to be
> a silly warning.
>
> By the time the array-bounds checker runs we have this statement in the IL:
>
> > MEM[(int *)_42 + -4B] ={v} {CLOBBER(eob)};
>
> Naturally that
An interesting little bug. We're just emitting what appears to me to be
a silly warning.
By the time the array-bounds checker runs we have this statement in the IL:
MEM[(int *)_42 + -4B] ={v} {CLOBBER(eob)};
Naturally that looks like an out of bounds array index and we warn.
Which see
