Re: [PATCH] Allow copying of symbolic ranges to an irange.

[Andrew MacLeod <amacleod@redhat.com>]

On 9/16/20 12:25 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
>
>
> >>  // Swap min/max if they are out of order.  Return TRUE if further
> > these seems OK, but can't there be anti-ranges with symbolics  too? ie
> > ~[a_12, a_12]
> > The code for that just does:
> >
> >   else if (src.kind () == VR_ANTI_RANGE)
> >      set (src.min (), src.max (), VR_ANTI_RANGE);
> >
> > That should just go to varying I guess?
>
> Ah, you're right.  I've tweaked the patch and have added a 
> corresponding test.
>
> >
> > The conversion to legacy anti-range code also seems a little suspect in
> > some cases...
> >
> > Finally, we theoretically shouldn't be accessing 'min()' and 'max()'
> > fields in a multirange, which also looks like might happen in the final
> > else clause.
> >
> > I wonder if it might be less complex to simply have 2 routines, like
> > copy_to_legacy()  and copy_from_legacy()  instead of trying to handle
> > then together?  I do find it seems to require more thinking than it
> > should to follow the cases :-)
>
> Sigh, yes.  That code is too clever for its own good.  I'll work on it 
> as a follow-up.
>
> OK pending tests?
>
OK.  but do follow it up.

Andrew