On 17 July 2015 at 09:32, James Greenhalgh <james.greenha...@arm.com> wrote: > This seems an odd limitation, presumably this is a side effect of waiting > until expand time to throw an error... It does suggest that we're tackling > the problem in the wrong way by pushing this to so late in the compilation > pipeline. The property here is on a type itself, which must take a constant > value within a given range. That feels much more like the sort of thing > we should be detecting and bailing out on closer to the front-end - perhaps > with a more generic extension allowing you to annotate any type with an > expected/required range (both as a helping hand for VRP and as a way to > express programmer defined preconditions). > > But, given that adding such an extension is likely more effort than needed
Agreed on all counts :) > I think this is OK for now! Thanks. Committed in r226059 with suggested fixes. The attribute typo fix was applied separately (https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-07/msg01816.html). Thanks Charles
