-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 04/21/11 11:26, Steven Bosscher wrote: >> Bootstrapped and regression tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. OK for >> trunk? > > Would this also fix PR18046? Also note that the assertion machinery doesn't really have the concept of anti-ranges, much less the ability to build up an anti-range by repeatedly excluding part of a range (say as we iterate over the labels that go somewhere other than the default).
So while it wouldn't be terribly hard to deal with this testcase, it's not going to be very effective on real world code. To be effective on real world code we need to: 1. Lower trivial switches 2. build up anti-ranges as we encounter case labels that go elsewhere 3. track distinct values in a range at meet points If you look at something like Coverity it clearly does this kind of analysis and represents a clear case where Coverity can do better localized code analysis. jeff -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJNsIZVAAoJEBRtltQi2kC7004H/jjGdzr1+WM5z+XMSGzLlLhF crz7ALIi/Ul+icUdlre+F1gUofAp+8g210uYESbeEJvPTtX7lBS0dQe+TX6r1Xvr 7kjKe2/iP1fl7lQzkNnbOqXygbmEFKG1ySwKIg0XkD7he58BDSAOaC1OgArpJAvI ppYZAO1Tkkqy/38+Jdj2emFbiayFqbHmPid0QaoMywDkxl3a5ZElQo1+h2jpUEir is8fb4tULoiswD4xL9PgNw5xFgDfqUUjXYVDEBWgQDI0DRaXJd/utO9C+Rg2to2S jxFnrZ8ljSZ++KapVHSjDrRSiTm+tDFaGxRHz1+8VtBn9siBHs4yFoZ1VjgbrZ4= =bNEt -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
