------- Comment #4 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-03 19:44 -------
Subject: Re: Missed optimization of comparison with 'limited
range'
On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 19:22 +0000, trt at acm dot org wrote:
>
> ------- Comment #3 from trt at acm dot org 2006-04-03 19:22 -------
> Since x is unsigned char, default promotions apply and x+1 will be a signed
> integer in the range 1..256
In that case, VRP should be able to extract the useful "~0" range from
this.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27007
