On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 05:12:38PM -0000, Eric Blake wrote: > On 01/11/2017 10:41 AM, dcb wrote: > > Public bug reported: > > > > target/ppc/int_helper.c:2806:25: warning: ‘*’ in boolean context, > > suggest ‘&&’ instead [-Wint-in-bool-context] > > > > Source code is > > > > zone_digit = (i * 2) ? b->u8[BCD_DIG_BYTE(i * 2)] >> 4 : > > zone_lead; > > Also, looking at BCD_DIG_BYTE(): > > #if defined(HOST_WORDS_BIGENDIAN) > #define BCD_DIG_BYTE(n) (15 - (n/2)) > #else > #define BCD_DIG_BYTE(n) (n/2) > #endif > > Oops. n is under-parenthesized, and will cause invalid expansions for > some expressions. Let's fix that as well. > Hello guys!!
Do you mean something like: BCD_DIG_BYTE(n) (15 - ((n)/2)) and BCD_DIG_BYTE(n) ((n)/2) ? to avoid issues like BCD_DIG_BYTE(i + 3) that will expand to (i + 3/2) instead of ((i + 3)/2), right? > > > so I think the compiler warning is for the i * 2 lhs of the ?. > > Yes - the compiler is complaining that 'i * 2' can only be non-zero if > 'i' was non-zero (given that the code occurs in a loop for i between 0 > and 16), so it is just as easy to write 'i ? ...' instead of the weirder > '(i * 2) ? ...'. > Yes, Eric is correct it's meant to be "(i) ? .. : .." because the sign is located at position 0. I'm improving it. I'll send a patch for them today. Thanks!
