On Mon, Aug 5, 2019 at 10:28 AM Eric Botcazou wrote:
>
> > Testing went OK but it looks like acats doesn't honor
> > RUNTESTFLAGS so I got no multilib testing for it :/
> > And the PR didn't contain sth I could plug into gnat.dg so I checked
> > with visual inspection of dumps on the reduced testc
> Testing went OK but it looks like acats doesn't honor
> RUNTESTFLAGS so I got no multilib testing for it :/
> And the PR didn't contain sth I could plug into gnat.dg so I checked
> with visual inspection of dumps on the reduced testcase.
Sorry about that, gnat.dg/array37.adb now attached.
> I n
Hi Richard,
> Testing went OK but it looks like acats doesn't honor
> RUNTESTFLAGS so I got no multilib testing for it :/
indeed, see PR testsuite/37703. I had the beginnings of a patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-01/msg02310.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/201
On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 10:24 AM Richard Biener
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 7:11 PM Eric Botcazou wrote:
> >
> > > So isn't this an issue with the code before when we have a RANGE_EXPR
> > > that covers the wrapping point?
> >
> > No, see the reduced testcase attached in the PR.
> >
> > > Th
On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 7:11 PM Eric Botcazou wrote:
>
> > So isn't this an issue with the code before when we have a RANGE_EXPR
> > that covers the wrapping point?
>
> No, see the reduced testcase attached in the PR.
>
> > Then index > max_index and may not catch the found element with
> >
> >
> So isn't this an issue with the code before when we have a RANGE_EXPR
> that covers the wrapping point?
No, see the reduced testcase attached in the PR.
> Then index > max_index and may not catch the found element with
>
> /* Do we have match? */
> if (wi::cmpu (access_index, index) >
On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 10:27 AM Eric Botcazou wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> this fixes the cd2a31a regression in the ACATS testsuite on 32-bit targets
> introduced by the recent change to get_array_ctor_element_at_index:
>
> * fold-const.h (get_array_ctor_element_at_index): Adjust.
> * fold-c
