--- Comment #5 from eyal at eyal dot emu dot id dot au 2007-07-14 14:41
---
(In reply to comment #4)
The attached sample program ended up against bug 31926...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32607
Component: libmudflap
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: eyal at eyal dot emu dot id dot au
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: gcc version 4.1.0 20050302 (experimental)
GCC host triplet: Linux 2.6.11 SMP i686 GN
--- Additional Comments From eyal at eyal dot emu dot id dot au 2005-03-06
02:16 ---
Created an attachment (id=8340)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8340&action=view)
Sample program to demonstrate the problem
Adjust the compiler setup at the top ($cc is neede
--- Comment #4 from eyal at eyal dot emu dot id dot au 2009-02-12 08:28
---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Confirmed. I have a patch for this for 4.5.
>
> The new wording will say:
>
> warning: logical 'or' applied to non-boolean constant.
>
> Are you sati
riority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: eyal at eyal dot emu dot id dot au
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32061
--- Comment #2 from eyal at eyal dot emu dot id dot au 2007-05-24 01:00
---
(In reply to comment #1)
> I don't see the problem because
> "xx.c:7: warning: logical '&&' with non-zero constant will always evaluate as
> true"
> means the non-ze
--- Comment #4 from eyal at eyal dot emu dot id dot au 2007-07-14 08:51
---
(In reply to comment #2)
> svn revision 126249
Using svn 126635 (and earlier for the last few weeks) I have a similar failure
with sample code that I reduced to under 90 lines (no includes). Maybe easier
--- Comment #5 from eyal at eyal dot emu dot id dot au 2007-07-14 08:53
---
Created an attachment (id=13913)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13913&action=view)
Eyal's example
Program demonstrating the failure
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sho
--- Comment #4 from eyal at eyal dot emu dot id dot au 2007-10-29 07:46
---
(In reply to comment #3)
> I can reproduce this on powerpc64-linux with a compiler from 20070630 but not
> with anything after 30070731; can anyone else still reproduce the failure, or
> has it been
