[Bug rtl-optimization/48580] missed optimization: integer overflow checks

2011-04-12 Thread joseph at codesourcery dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48580 --- Comment #7 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2011-04-12 21:16:41 UTC --- On Tue, 12 Apr 2011, zackw at panix dot com wrote: > Addendum: what would *you* describe as the correct C idiom for > ensuring that the product of two signed integers

[Bug rtl-optimization/48580] missed optimization: integer overflow checks

2011-04-12 Thread joseph at codesourcery dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48580 --- Comment #6 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2011-04-12 21:09:53 UTC --- On Tue, 12 Apr 2011, zackw at panix dot com wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48580 > > --- Comment #4 from Zack Weinberg 2011-04-12 > 21:03:01 U

[Bug rtl-optimization/48580] missed optimization: integer overflow checks

2011-04-12 Thread zackw at panix dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48580 --- Comment #5 from Zack Weinberg 2011-04-12 21:04:34 UTC --- Addendum: what would *you* describe as the correct C idiom for ensuring that the product of two signed integers was positive and did not overflow the range of a same-sized signed integ

[Bug rtl-optimization/48580] missed optimization: integer overflow checks

2011-04-12 Thread zackw at panix dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48580 --- Comment #4 from Zack Weinberg 2011-04-12 21:03:01 UTC --- On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 1:52 PM, joseph at codesourcery dot com wrote: >> In the code that this is cut down from, both arguments are known to be >> strictly >> positive, but neither

[Bug rtl-optimization/48580] missed optimization: integer overflow checks

2011-04-12 Thread joseph at codesourcery dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48580 --- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2011-04-12 20:52:48 UTC --- On Tue, 12 Apr 2011, zackw at panix dot com wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48580 > > --- Comment #2 from Zack Weinberg 2011-04-12 > 20:40:41 U

[Bug rtl-optimization/48580] missed optimization: integer overflow checks

2011-04-12 Thread zackw at panix dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48580 --- Comment #2 from Zack Weinberg 2011-04-12 20:40:41 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > > Two signed integers given that they are known to be positive, anyway. > This may return unexpected results if either or both arguments are > negative o

[Bug rtl-optimization/48580] missed optimization: integer overflow checks

2011-04-12 Thread joseph at codesourcery dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48580 --- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2011-04-12 20:18:13 UTC --- On Tue, 12 Apr 2011, zackw at panix dot com wrote: > To the best of my knowledge, this is the only safe way (without -fwrapv) to > check whether the product of two sig