vsavchenko added a comment. In D103440#2797991 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D103440#2797991>, @manas wrote:
>> I also would like to see tests where the ranges are not going all the way to >> either INT_MIN or INT_MAX (if we talk about int), but overflow still might >> happen, and cases where overflow might happen, but we still can identify the >> overflowing results precisely (e.g. the result is `[INT_MIN, INT_MIN + 10] >> and [INT_MAX - 5, INT_MAX]`) > > If I understood correctly, does a case like: `c, d in [INT_MAX/2 - 10, > INT_MAX/2 + 10]` works? It will produce an overflowing range of `[INT_MIN, > INT_MIN + 18] U [INT_MAX - 21, INT_MAX]`. I will add that to the test-set, if > that is so. Yes, exactly! Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D103440/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D103440 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
