Re: [PATCH] Refactor away an obsolete is_unsigned distinction in is_value_included_in

On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 6:21 AM Vladislav Ivanishin wrote: > > Hi! > > This is just a clean-up. During the course of past refactorings, the > then and else branches of `if (is_unsigned)` in is_value_included_in() > became semantically equivalent and almost textually identical. This > patch remov

[PATCH] Refactor away an obsolete is_unsigned distinction in is_value_included_in

Hi! This is just a clean-up. During the course of past refactorings, the then and else branches of `if (is_unsigned)` in is_value_included_in() became semantically equivalent and almost textually identical. This patch removes the conditional altogether. Regtested and bootstrapped with `BOOT_CFL