From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id 00DC7387084B; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 22:55:55 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 00DC7387084B
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
 s=default; t=1598482556;
 bh=wY4QcRQmXVGPDSLHkx8KX2LQhPeIcDH+aVyjveykvB8=;
 h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
 b=U1llauQUcLmuMJL5DNf6lNmOj35GPCeXApSq4XwWzeZWYqVoK+jlXFIHYFtsqHRFk
 I48USj5tNQmIndXmue4xR/CsQ+IdMEm3M/PXpW4ypdDPnR04iWyiUAzC2OysxuGEbw
 ofOTmvBeqtuqNW3bVEwt5HUVUGA3g0unKZN1Jo0A=
From: "joseph at codesourcery dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/96788] "integer constant is so large that it is unsigned"
 warning is incorrect
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 22:55:55 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: joseph at codesourcery dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
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: 
Message-ID: <bug-96788-4-EbsKymazAg@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-96788-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-96788-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 22:55:56 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D96788

--- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com <joseph at codesourcery =
dot com> ---
The way GCC actually behaves is that this constant is unsigned in the=20
preprocessor but signed outside the preprocessor.  I'm not sure that's=20
exactly intent (though the preprocessor having only a single signed and=20
unsigned type, with this constant not fitting in the signed type, means it=
=20
couldn't be interpreted as signed in the preprocessor if allowed in #if=20
expressions at all).  The warnings are attempting to cover both the C90=20
case where a decimal constant too large for signed long can be unsigned=20
long, and the case of a constant too large for intmax_t.=