This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Add checks for tree.value, tree.minval, and tree.maxval andothers
- From: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>
- To: Richard Kenner <kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu>
- Cc: "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 08:44:25 -0500
- Subject: Re: Add checks for tree.value, tree.minval, and tree.maxval andothers
- Organization: Red Hat Canada
- References: <10403260444.AA10450@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>
On Thu, 2004-03-25 at 23:44, Richard Kenner wrote:
> The check for TYPE_DOMAIN seems wrong. It is not allowing
> INTEGER_TYPEs, which, according to doc/c-tree.texi, it should. This
> causes an ICE in tree-ssa inside c-typeck.c:comptypes() where we have
> if (TREE_CODE (t2) == INTEGER_TYPE && TYPE_IS_SIZETYPE (t2)
> && TYPE_DOMAIN (t2) != 0)
> t2 = TYPE_DOMAIN (t2);
> OK for mainline after bootstrapping?
> No. Instead the TYPE_DOMAIN above should be TYPE_ORIG_SIZE_TYPE like
> comptypes in cp/typeck.c
How about the doc inconsistency? Is that wrong too? When did it
change? The code I quoted comes from a patch of yours in March 2000.
There's at least another similar hunk in that file.