[Bug tree-optimization/55616] bogus warning about undefined overflow after overflow check

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55616 --- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski --- GCC 8+ does not warn any more. I Have not checked why yet.

[Bug tree-optimization/55616] bogus warning about undefined overflow after overflow check

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55616 Florian Weimer fweimer at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||than at

[Bug tree-optimization/55616] bogus warning about undefined overflow after overflow check

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55616 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at

[Bug tree-optimization/55616] bogus warning about undefined overflow after overflow check

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55616 --- Comment #4 from Florian Weimer fweimer at redhat dot com 2013-01-31 10:26:12 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) I don't see anything bogus on the warning, it is useful to inform the developer about potentially unintended optimization

[Bug tree-optimization/55616] bogus warning about undefined overflow after overflow check

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55616 --- Comment #5 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-31 10:47:55 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) (In reply to comment #3) I don't see anything bogus on the warning, it is useful to inform the developer about

[Bug tree-optimization/55616] bogus warning about undefined overflow after overflow check

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55616 --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-31 10:52:15 UTC --- Just write number_of_elements_in_path+100U or use unsigned type for number_of_elements_in_path

[Bug tree-optimization/55616] bogus warning about undefined overflow after overflow check

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55616 --- Comment #7 from Florian Weimer fweimer at redhat dot com 2013-01-31 11:05:48 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) Just write number_of_elements_in_path+100U or use unsigned type for number_of_elements_in_path Thanks, this is

[Bug tree-optimization/55616] bogus warning about undefined overflow after overflow check

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55616 --- Comment #8 from Than Ngo than at redhat dot com 2013-01-31 11:14:25 UTC --- number_of_elements_in_path is already defined as unsigned type, so we need both in this case to get rid of this warning thanks

[Bug tree-optimization/55616] bogus warning about undefined overflow after overflow check

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55616 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-31 11:20:41 UTC --- You haven't provided preprocessed testcase, if number_of_elements_in_path is unsigned short, then supposedly the compiler could figure out that

[Bug tree-optimization/55616] bogus warning about undefined overflow after overflow check

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55616 Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|