public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "marc.glisse at normalesup dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/43772] Errant -Wlogical-op warning when testing limits
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2012 22:17:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-43772-4-1b6oq1rMYR@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-43772-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43772

--- Comment #19 from Marc Glisse <marc.glisse at normalesup dot org> 2012-04-28 22:16:55 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #18)
> I'm afraid that false positives would still be likely.
> For example, suppose we're on a platform where
> INT_MAX = LONG_MAX < INTMAX_MAX.  Then:
> 
>   intmax_t i = (whatever);
>   if (INT_MAX < i && i <= LONG_MAX)
>      print ("i is in 'long' but not 'int' range");

Have you actually seen that? I would imagine the following to be more common:
if(i<=INT_MAX)
  print("i is in 'int'");
else if(i<=LONG_MAX)
  ...

> This sort of thing is fairly common in portable code,
> and GCC shouldn't warn about it merely because
> we're on a platform where the two tests cannot both
> be true when INT_MAX == LONG_MAX.

Well, can you define a set of circumstances where gcc could / should warn?
a<i&&i<=a seems to be quite precisely what this warning is about. Or maybe
a==INT_MAX (adapt depending on the type) should disable the warning, as a
special case?

Please also remember that we are not talking of having this warning by default,
this is an isolated warning not even included in -Wall -Wextra.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-04-28 22:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <bug-43772-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2011-06-15 19:20 ` eggert at gnu dot org
2011-07-15  3:02 ` eggert at gnu dot org
2012-04-28 12:20 ` marc.glisse at normalesup dot org
2012-04-28 12:33 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-28 12:34 ` marc.glisse at normalesup dot org
2012-04-28 12:38 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-28 12:40 ` marc.glisse at normalesup dot org
2012-04-28 12:50 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-28 12:56 ` marc.glisse at normalesup dot org
2012-04-28 13:08 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-04-28 18:50 ` marc.glisse at normalesup dot org
2012-04-28 21:53 ` eggert at gnu dot org
2012-04-28 22:17 ` marc.glisse at normalesup dot org [this message]
2012-04-28 22:41 ` eggert at gnu dot org
2012-05-05 11:32 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-05-05 12:15 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-06-10 23:19 ` P at draigBrady dot com
2010-04-16 21:44 [Bug c/43772] New: " P at draigBrady dot com
2010-04-17 11:03 ` [Bug c/43772] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-17 17:41 ` P at draigBrady dot com
2010-04-22  0:38 ` P at draigBrady dot com
2010-09-23  6:52 ` muntyan at fastmail dot fm
2010-09-23  8:13 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-09-23  8:24 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=bug-43772-4-1b6oq1rMYR@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).