This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug middle-end/50066] [4.7 Regression] Bad signed int to unsigned long long conversion
- From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2011 18:17:24 +0000
- Subject: [Bug middle-end/50066] [4.7 Regression] Bad signed int to unsigned long long conversion
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-50066-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50066
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-08-13 18:17:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> Created attachment 25006 [details]
> A patch
>
> GMP code may be buggy. But it works with all other compilers,
> including GCC 4.6.0 and older. Is there any particular good
> reason to ignore range overflow? This patch checks range
> overflow and caused no regressions on Linux/x86.
No Again we decided long ago to have overflow declared as being undefined and
ignoring range overflow is not what we decided. It might work with other
compilers does not mean it is valid and well defined code.