On 07/21/2015 04:56 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
Ping.
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 06:38:12PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
Ok, in that case I think easiest would the following (I hit the same issue
when writing the -Wtautological-compare patch):
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
Ping.
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 06:38:12PM +0200, Marek Polacek wrote:
Ok, in that case I think easiest would the following (I hit the same issue
when writing the -Wtautological-compare patch):
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
2015-07-14 Marek Polacek
On 07/14/2015 07:38 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
Ok, in that case I think easiest would the following (I hit the same issue
when writing the -Wtautological-compare patch):
Thanks for taking care of this issue.
--
Regards,
Mikhail Maltsev
Sorry it's taken so long to respond.
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 05:43:05PM +0300, Mikhail Maltsev wrote:
That looks wrong, because with TREE_CONSTANT we'd warn in C but not in C++
for the following:
const int a = 4;
void
f (void)
{
const int b = 4;
static const int c = 5;
On 23.06.2015 22:49, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 03:02:06AM +0300, Mikhail Maltsev wrote:
- /* We do not warn for constants because they are typical of macro
- expansions that test for features. */
- if (CONSTANT_CLASS_P (op_left) || CONSTANT_CLASS_P (op_right))
+ /*
On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 03:02:06AM +0300, Mikhail Maltsev wrote:
- /* We do not warn for constants because they are typical of macro
- expansions that test for features. */
- if (CONSTANT_CLASS_P (op_left) || CONSTANT_CLASS_P (op_right))
+ /* We do not warn for literal constants
