On 10/19/20 1:16 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
Rebased on current trunk.
FWIW, we finally get rid of the Walloca-6.c XFAIL. This has been a long time
in coming:
-/* { dg-xfail-if "Currently broken but Andrew's work should fix this" { *-*-*
} } */
:-)
OK?
You are the original author of this
Rebased on current trunk.
FWIW, we finally get rid of the Walloca-6.c XFAIL. This has been a long time
in coming:
-/* { dg-xfail-if "Currently broken but Andrew's work should fix this" { *-*-*
} } */
:-)
OK?
Aldy
gcc/ChangeLog:
* gimple-ssa-warn-alloca.c (enum alloca_type):
On 10/5/20 7:12 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
It the future, I would even like to remove the specific range the
ranger was able to compute from the error message itself. As will
become obvious, the ranger can get pretty outrageous ranges that are
entirely non-obvious by looking at the code.
On 10/5/20 3:51 AM, Aldy Hernandez via Gcc-patches wrote:
The walloca pass is a mess. It has all sorts of heuristics to divine
problematic ranges fed into alloca, none of them very good, and all of
them unreadable. The mess therein was actually one of the original
motivators for the ranger
On 10/5/20 11:28 AM, David Malcolm via Gcc-patches wrote:
On Mon, 2020-10-05 at 11:51 +0200, Aldy Hernandez via Gcc-patches
wrote:
The walloca pass is a mess. It has all sorts of heuristics to
divine
problematic ranges fed into alloca, none of them very good, and all
of
them unreadable. The
On Mon, 2020-10-05 at 11:51 +0200, Aldy Hernandez via Gcc-patches
wrote:
> The walloca pass is a mess. It has all sorts of heuristics to
> divine
> problematic ranges fed into alloca, none of them very good, and all
> of
> them unreadable. The mess therein was actually one of the original
>
The walloca pass is a mess. It has all sorts of heuristics to divine
problematic ranges fed into alloca, none of them very good, and all of
them unreadable. The mess therein was actually one of the original
motivators for the ranger project (along with array bounds checking).
The attached
