------- Additional Comments From dnovillo at redhat dot com 2005-09-30 13:27 ------- Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] wrong code due to VRP
On September 30, 2005 09:24, jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > 2005-09-30 13:24 ------- Jim's patch certainly worked for me. But > the question is if we can do more. If not anti-range and > limit_vr->min == limit_vr->max, then we at least can create > anti-range from TYPE_MIN_VALUE to TYPE_MAX_VALUE. Right. That's what I'm trying to determine ATM. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23604
