This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug libstdc++/22200] numeric_limits<signed>::is_modulo is inconsistend with gcc
- From: "gdr at integrable-solutions dot net" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 27 Jun 2005 16:09:10 -0000
- Subject: [Bug libstdc++/22200] numeric_limits<signed>::is_modulo is inconsistend with gcc
- References: <20050627151911.22200.veksler@il.ibm.com>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2005-06-27 16:09 -------
Subject: Re: numeric_limits<signed>::is_modulo is inconsistend with gcc
"pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> writes:
| I think we need to read:
| "ISO/IEC 10967-1 Language Independent Arithmetic, part 1" since that
| is what the standard references for is_modulo.
yes, as pointed out in the message I sent.
It was pointed out that the loop optimizers was making some
assumtpions. If the only is only for the loop optimizers, then we
can also consider the option of explicitly allowing specific behaviour
for induction variables. At any rate, a proper resolution for this
PR is hardly "the standard says it is undefined behaviour".
-- Gaby
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22200