[Bug c/60090] For expression without ~, gcc -O1 emits "comparison of promoted ~unsigned with unsigned"

["mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8", Size: 2701 bytes --]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60090

--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #5)
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2013-11/msg00253.html

Exactly.  I hope I can tackle at least a part of it in next stage 1.

> In those cases where folding helps to avoid false positives, it would be nice
> to be able to still fold on-demand or to delay the warnings until folding can 
> happen.

Sure.
>From gcc-bugs-return-442831-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Thu Feb 06 13:06:27 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-442831-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 21878 invoked by alias); 6 Feb 2014 13:06:26 -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 21801 invoked by uid 48); 6 Feb 2014 13:06:21 -0000
From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/60092] posix_memalign not recognized to derive alias and alignment info
Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2014 13:06:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: middle-end
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: alias, missed-optimization
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: attachments.created
Message-ID: <bug-60092-4-ao4ecQGf4E@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-60092-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-60092-4@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/msg00588.txt.bz2
Content-length: 375

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id`092

--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 32066
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id2066&actioníit
part #2, C11 aligned_alloc

It was noted that aligned_alloc is standard enough to be supported (and with
nicer interface albeit possibly clobbering errno ...).