On Jun 24, 2013, at 9:06 , Matthew Dempsky <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 9:03 AM, Jordan Rose <[email protected]> wrote: > There aren't any...all of the symmetrical operations require both arguments > to be of the same type. I'm pretty sure the "Special case" below for the > compare-and-swap functions is now dead code. > > That sounds plausible to me. > > Do you think it'd worth adding an assertion that we never get a comparison op > here? > > Yep, removing the isComparisonOp() code path, and adding an assert to ensure > it isn't reached (before the rhs.isZeroConstant() check) sounds good to me. Done in r185401. Thanks! Jordan
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
