On 6/28/25 3:08 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 06:49:12PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 6/27/25 5:58 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
The following testcase is miscompiled since the introduction of UBSan,
cp_build_array_ref COND_EXPR handling replaces
(cond ? a : b)[idx] with cond ?
On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 06:49:12PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 6/27/25 5:58 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > The following testcase is miscompiled since the introduction of UBSan,
> > cp_build_array_ref COND_EXPR handling replaces
> > (cond ? a : b)[idx] with cond ? a[idx] : b[idx], but if there a
On 6/27/25 5:58 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
Hi!
The following testcase is miscompiled since the introduction of UBSan,
cp_build_array_ref COND_EXPR handling replaces
(cond ? a : b)[idx] with cond ? a[idx] : b[idx], but if there are
SAVE_EXPRs inside of idx, they will be evaluated just in one of the
Hi!
The following testcase is miscompiled since the introduction of UBSan,
cp_build_array_ref COND_EXPR handling replaces
(cond ? a : b)[idx] with cond ? a[idx] : b[idx], but if there are
SAVE_EXPRs inside of idx, they will be evaluated just in one of the
branches and the other uses uninitialized
