On 14/01/07, Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
> You are getting two overflow warnings for the same expression? That
> should not happen (TM). The TREE_OVERFLOW bit should have been noticed
> and prevent giving another warning. Roger, do you agree on this?
>
> Paolo, would you mind opening a bug report for this? I will look at it
> as soon as I can.
Sure. In fact, I was scratching my head about that. To be honest, I'm
still not completely acquainted with the new warning (and I'm
particularly interested because -Wsystem-headers triggers quite a few
from the library...)
New? Woverflow is not new, as far as I know, if was just a bit broken,
especially in C++. But in these cases in particular, nothing should
have changed since we branched 4.2.
Let me know the PR number please.
Thanks,
Manuel.
