[Bug c/59753] -Woverflow warning inconsistency with signed constant conversion between T_MAX+1 and UT_MAX vs larger than UT_MAX

["vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59753

Vincent Lefèvre <vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |UNCONFIRMED
         Resolution|WORKSFORME                  |---
            Summary|Missing -Woverflow warning  |-Woverflow warning
                   |with signed constant        |inconsistency with signed
                   |conversion between T_MAX+1  |constant conversion between
                   |and UT_MAX                  |T_MAX+1 and UT_MAX vs
                   |                            |larger than UT_MAX

--- Comment #4 from Vincent Lefèvre <vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net> ---
There's still an inconsistency without -Wpedantic, which is the point of this
bug. I've changed the bug title to:

  -Woverflow warning inconsistency with signed constant conversion between
T_MAX+1 and UT_MAX vs larger than UT_MAX

If this inconsistency is intentional, then it should be documented. The current
behavior doesn't match the documentation:

    -Wno-overflow
        Do not warn about compile-time overflow in constant expressions.

I fail to see why there should be a warning for

  short c = 65536;

but not for

  short b = 65535;

BTW, there's actually no overflow in the constant expressions themselves, just
in the assignments.
>From gcc-bugs-return-442704-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Wed Feb 05 16:45:24 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-442704-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 25019 invoked by alias); 5 Feb 2014 16:45:23 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 24988 invoked by uid 48); 5 Feb 2014 16:45:20 -0000
From: "ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug ada/60078] acats c761007 fails on ARM
Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 16:45:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: ada
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: WAITING
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on cc everconfirmed
Message-ID: <bug-60078-4-mh7ooRu9uv@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-60078-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-60078-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2014-02/txt/msg00461.txt.bz2
Content-length: 700

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id`078

Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |WAITING
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2014-02-05
                 CC|                            |ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #1 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Is that on real hardware or simulator?  This test is one of the infamous tests
that require very solid concurrency support from the environment.