From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <nykseli@protonmail.com>
Received: from mail-40132.protonmail.ch (mail-40132.protonmail.ch
 [185.70.40.132])
 by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C506F383A31A
 for <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>; Sat,  4 Jun 2022 11:55:08 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org C506F383A31A
Date: Sat, 04 Jun 2022 11:55:02 +0000
To: Yair Lenga <yair.lenga@gmail.com>
From: Miika <nykseli@protonmail.com>
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Reply-To: Miika <nykseli@protonmail.com>
Subject: [RFC] Support for nonzero attribute
Message-ID: <frxPLg2g6nUhRExsXL-1TccEZWJzj-8LxYNTRdZ4aN8FOk9G73dTQOfwInGHn9e6j3zldrij_F2STOcY5Fv4-qIykTGtPL6m1QM8n91hvQ4=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAK3_KpO=VFWmB0AdtNOqNrVjv29pU4jxNgfko14qTWHzYBxivw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.2312.1654300374.1672222.gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
 <CAK3_KpO=VFWmB0AdtNOqNrVjv29pU4jxNgfko14qTWHzYBxivw@mail.gmail.com>
Feedback-ID: 17471336:user:proton
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED,
 DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, FREEMAIL_FROM, SPF_HELO_PASS,
 SPF_PASS, TXREP,
 T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on
 server2.sourceware.org
X-BeenThere: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc mailing list <gcc.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc>,
 <mailto:gcc-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc>,
 <mailto:gcc-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 04 Jun 2022 11:55:12 -0000

On Saturday, June 4th, 2022 at 1:26 PM, Yair Lenga via Gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org=
> wrote:
> The specific non-zero constraint is a specific implementation of the rang=
e
> operator (with some exception see below). Wanted to suggest going for
> more ambitious goal: add min and max attributes to (integer) types and
> variables. This will address the specific case of non-zero, but has a lot
> of potential to be built upon: can be used for compile time testing, run
> time parameter checking, storage optimization (similar to packed), run ti=
me
> optimization (e.g. eliminating runtime tests), .... Also expected range
> information can have a positive impact on code safety/validation.


I like this idea a lot too. I'll definitely look into adding a "range"
variable attribute after the work with function attributes is done.
I'm not that familiar with GCC's optimizer but basic compiler warnings
should be fairly easy to implement.

Miika