On October 28, 2015 7:07:54 PM GMT+01:00, Richard Henderson <r...@redhat.com> wrote: >On 10/28/2015 10:47 AM, Alexander Monakov wrote: >> Hello Richard, >> >> Your commit to fix PR 65000 (pasted below) introduced >> gcc_assert (ri = (int)ri); >> >> I'm unclear what is meant there; if equality test was meant, that >looks >> suspicious to me because truncating conversion is >implementation-defined. > >Of course equality was meant. And since the argument to bitmap_set_bit >is of >type int, the same truncation would happen there. So this just >verifies that >we don't lose information during the conversion. > >Since implementation defined doesn't mean undefined, I see no problem.
And ri == 0 cannot happen? > >r~
