[Bug libstdc++/96449] New: libstdc++-v3/src/c++17/floating_from_chars.cc:326:Found duplicate branches for 'if' and 'else'

[Bug libstdc++/96449] New: libstdc++-v3/src/c++17/floating_from_chars.cc:326:Found duplicate branches for 'if' and 'else'

[dcb314 at hotmail dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96449

            Bug ID: 96449
           Summary: libstdc++-v3/src/c++17/floating_from_chars.cc:326:Foun
                    d duplicate branches for 'if' and 'else'
           Product: gcc
           Version: unknown
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: libstdc++
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: dcb314 at hotmail dot com
  Target Milestone: ---

Source code is

            if (isinf(tmpval)) // overflow
              ec = errc::result_out_of_range;
            else // underflow (LWG 3081 wants to set value = tmpval here)
              ec = errc::result_out_of_range;

Maybe the if statement is not required or the branches should be different ?

[Bug libstdc++/96449] libstdc++-v3/src/c++17/floating_from_chars.cc:326:Found duplicate branches for 'if' and 'else'

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96449

Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Resolution|---                         |INVALID
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |RESOLVED

--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
This is intentional. As the comment says, the branches might be different in
future, so I'm leaving them like that.

[Bug libstdc++/96449] libstdc++-v3/src/c++17/floating_from_chars.cc:326:Found duplicate branches for 'if' and 'else'

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96449

Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Resolution|INVALID                     |WONTFIX

--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Actually I guess WONTFIX is more accurate, since the report is right.

[Bug libstdc++/96449] libstdc++-v3/src/c++17/floating_from_chars.cc:326:Found duplicate branches for 'if' and 'else'

[dcb314 at hotmail dot com]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96449

--- Comment #3 from David Binderman <dcb314 at hotmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> As the comment says, the branches might be different in future

It is not clear to me that the comment says that.

Suggest new comment text:

// Intentional duplicate branches. They may change in the future.