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: [PATCH] Don't add a new label for implicit default label if case labels cover the whole range (PR middle-end/39666)


On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 01:13:22AM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > Maybe Eric can confirm if gigi uses base types for switch operands.
> 
> No, it doesn't, you need to be careful. :-(  I've reverted the problematic Ada 
> change for now.  Jakub, would you mind re-testing with Ada?  TIA.
> 

I've just tested it and there are no regressions even with Ada[*].

[*] The diff between vanilla r146995 bootstrap/regtest and the same with
this patch is:
-FAIL:  c94008c
-FAIL:  c95021a
-FAIL:  c951002
+FAIL:  c940007 
(+ with the patch, - vanilla), but I've seen c940007 test fail in the past
more than a dozen times, it fails pretty much randomly.

	Jakub


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