On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 3:52 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
<lopeziba...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This patch fixes almost all false positives in PR43772. The case not fixed is:
>
> intmax_t i = (whatever);
> if (INT_MAX < i && i <= LONG_MAX)
> print ("i is in 'long' but not 'int' ran")
>
> where we warn if INT_MAX = LONG_MAX < INTMAX_MAX. Perhaps with the
> macro location code, we could now tell that the constants INT_MAX and
> LONG_MAX come from different macro expansions in system headers, and
> avoid warning in this specific case, but that would be better done in
> a follow-up patch. Dodji, is that possible? how could it be done?
>
> Bootstrapped and regression tested.
>
> OK?
OK.
>
> 2012-05-05 Manuel López-Ibáñez <m...@gcc.gnu.org>
>
> PR c/43772
> c-family/
> * c-common.c (warn_logical_operator): Do not warn if either side
> is already true or false.
> testsuite/
> * c-c++-common/pr43772.c: New.
