This is the mail archive of the gcc-bugs@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]

[Bug tree-optimization/48766] [4.4/4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] Infinite recursion in fold_binary_loc()


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48766

Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-12-06 10:33:11 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> The combination -fwrapv -ftrapv is not particularly meaningful; it ought 
> to act exactly the same as -ftrapv (i.e. -ftrapv should override any 
> previous -fwrapv, and vice versa; -fwrapv -fno-trapv should mean -fwrapv 
> and -ftrapv -fno-wrapv should mean -ftrapv, as at present).

I suppose the new Negative() .opt file annotation cannot cover this?

Internally we probably should have a single enum that enumerates all
valid integer overflow behaviors (what about the weak -f[no-]strict-overflow)?


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