This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Add checks for tree.value, tree.minval, and tree.maxval andothers


On Thu, 18 Mar 2004, Richard Kenner wrote:

> Thu Mar 18 13:20:13 2004  Richard Kenner  <kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>

> 	* tree.c (type_hash_eq): Rewrite to access proper fields for each type.
> 	(tree_check2_failed, tree_check3_failed, tree_check5_failed): New.

> !       && (TYPE_MIN_VALUE (a->type) == TYPE_MIN_VALUE (b->type)
> ! 	  || tree_int_cst_equal (TYPE_MIN_VALUE (a->type),
> ! 				 TYPE_MIN_VALUE (b->type)))

> --- 3087,3173 ----

> ! 	      && (TYPE_MIN_VALUE (a->type) == TYPE_MIN_VALUE (b->type)
> ! 		  && tree_int_cst_equal (TYPE_MIN_VALUE (a->type),
> ! 					 TYPE_MIN_VALUE (b->type))));

Is there some reason this patch changed || to &&?  It looks like a typo to
me; the logic just above for TYPE_MAX_VALUE stayed as ||.  (This has shown
up as a problem with the bit-field patch, restricted-width bit-field types
not getting hashed properly.)

-- 
Joseph S. Myers               http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~jsm28/gcc/
    jsm@polyomino.org.uk (personal mail)
    jsm28@gcc.gnu.org (Bugzilla assignments and CCs)


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]