On Fri, 7 Oct 2022 at 17:13, Richard Henderson <richard.hender...@linaro.org> wrote: > > On 10/7/22 09:11, Peter Maydell wrote: > > On Fri, 7 Oct 2022 at 16:37, Richard Henderson > > <richard.hender...@linaro.org> wrote: > >> > >> On 10/7/22 02:24, Peter Maydell wrote: > >>>> + .ha = ha, > >>>> + .hd = ha & hd, > >>> > >>> This is a bitwise operation on two bools, should be && ? > >> > >> Bitwise works fine, but I can use boolean if you like. > >> > >> I'd be surprised (and filing a missed optimization bug) if the compiler > >> treated these two > >> operations differently in this case (simple bool operands with no side > >> effects). > > > > The different treatment I would expect would be that in the '&' > > case it warns you about using a bitwise operation on a boolean :-) > > Oh, well, no compiler should ever do that, because bool implicitly converts > to int for any > arithmetic, just like char.
Yeah, but -Wbool-operation is there to catch bugs where the bitwise operation was unintended and the wrong behaviour. -- PMM
