https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107882
--- Comment #2 from Tim Lange <tlange at gcc dot gnu.org> --- Created attachment 53979 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53979&action=edit patch for pr107882 I think the assertion here uncovered a bug. Currently, if the OTHER parameter of bit_range::contains_p is empty (i.e. of size zero), contains_p calls get_last_bit_offset, which result is only defined for non-empty ranges. Before r13-2582-g0ea5e3f4542832b8, the contains_p check was inconsistent, e.g. for (offset 1, size 1) and (offset 1, size 0), but true for (offset 0, size 2) and (offset 1, size 0). Not sure what the "right" fix is, as empty ranges sorta feel unnatural. Treating [i, 0] as a subset of (k, n) if k <= i <= k+n seems somewhat reasonable.
