http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58454
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58454
Ian Lance Taylor ian at airs dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58454
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||documentation
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58454
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gmail dot com pinskia at gmail dot com ---
All of these functions overflow the loop induction variable so only -fwrapv
will provide the behavior you want for all of the functions. The inconsistent
behavior is due to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58454
--- Comment #2 from mednafen at gmail dot com ---
Your assertion conflicts with the gcc 4.2 release change-list at
http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.2/changes.html when the strict-overflow options were
added.
Additionally, -fwrapv produces unnecessarily
