On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 10:14 PM, Sebastian Pop <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > Richard Biener wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 10:36 PM, Sebastian Paul Pop <s....@samsung.com> >> wrote: >> > Do you recommend that we add a gcc_assert that min is always lower than >> > max? >> >> No, min can be one less than max if the array has size zero. > > Maybe a typo: do you mean max can be one less than min?
Err, yes. > If the array has size zero, then I think ISL is correct in saying that there > are > no dependences. As we miscompiled the testcase, I think that the bug is in > the > Fortran front-end. That was my analysis as well. Richard.
