On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 3:59 PM Martin Sebor <mse...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 8/4/20 5:21 AM, Aldy Hernandez via Gcc-patches wrote: > > This is a rather obvious patch, but I'd like a nod before committing. > > > > Martin, I've removed your anti-range check, as it is subsumed by the > > lower_bound/upper_bound code. However, you will have to adapt the code > > for multi-ranges if desired. For example, you may want to loop through the > > sub-ranges and do the right thing. Look at value-range.h and see the > > comments > > for class irange. Those are the methods you should stick to. > > > > i.e. > > for (i=0; i < vr->num_pairs(); ++i) > > stuff_with(vr->lower_bound(i), vr->upper_bound(i)) > > > > There should be no functional changes with this patch. > > I have no concern with this change but I appreciate the heads > up and the tip on how to add the multi-range support. Just > one suggestion: I'd prefer to keep the comment about the POSIX > requirement somewhere just as a reminder.
The comment is still there, as you had a duplicate one further up: else if (dstsize > target_int_max ()) { warning_at (gimple_location (info.callstmt), info.warnopt (), "specified bound %wu exceeds %<INT_MAX%>", dstsize); /* POSIX requires snprintf to fail if DSTSIZE is greater than INT_MAX. Avoid folding in that case. */ posunder4k = false; } Are you ok with this, or would you rather me copy that comment somewhere else? Thanks. Aldy