tree-vrp.c (extract_range_from_assert): Remove special handling for types with super...

	* tree-vrp.c (extract_range_from_assert): Remove special
	handling for types with super-types.

From-SVN: r111600

diff --git a/gcc/ChangeLog b/gcc/ChangeLog
index ee23ce8d3b54766d9a48b082fec4d4aff5e3da38..b141b3ede910bc5137f3bd9e5305d3849cfcba9a 100644 (file)
--- a/gcc/ChangeLog
+++ b/gcc/ChangeLog
@@ -1,3 +1,8 @@
+2006-03-01  Diego Novillo  <dnovillo@redhat.com>
+
+       * tree-vrp.c (extract_range_from_assert): Remove special
+       handling for types with super-types.
+
 2006-03-01  Ben Elliston  <bje@au.ibm.com>
 
        * config.gcc: Add t-dfprules to $tmake_file for powerpc-*-linux*

diff --git a/gcc/tree-vrp.c b/gcc/tree-vrp.c
index c0fb35a9e889c215c0a50d19f0dd14838e803179..96a18277349735cd0b09d13c644abb744972efa1 100644 (file)
--- a/gcc/tree-vrp.c
+++ b/gcc/tree-vrp.c
@@ -826,66 +826,6 @@ extract_range_from_assert (value_range_t *vr_p, tree expr)
          || symbolic_range_p (limit_vr)))
     limit_vr = NULL;
 
-  /* Special handling for integral types with super-types.  Some FEs
-     construct integral types derived from other types and restrict
-     the range of values these new types may take.
-
-     It may happen that LIMIT is actually smaller than TYPE's minimum
-     value.  For instance, the Ada FE is generating code like this
-     during bootstrap:
-
-           D.1480_32 = nam_30 - 300000361;
-           if (D.1480_32 <= 1) goto <L112>; else goto <L52>;
-           <L112>:;
-           D.1480_94 = ASSERT_EXPR <D.1480_32, D.1480_32 <= 1>;
-
-     All the names are of type types__name_id___XDLU_300000000__399999999
-     which has min == 300000000 and max == 399999999.  This means that
-     the ASSERT_EXPR would try to create the range [3000000, 1] which
-     is invalid.
-
-     The fact that the type specifies MIN and MAX values does not
-     automatically mean that every variable of that type will always
-     be within that range, so the predicate may well be true at run
-     time.  If we had symbolic -INF and +INF values, we could
-     represent this range, but we currently represent -INF and +INF
-     using the type's min and max values.
-        
-     So, the only sensible thing we can do for now is set the
-     resulting range to VR_VARYING.  TODO, would having symbolic -INF
-     and +INF values be worth the trouble?  */
-  if (TREE_CODE (limit) != SSA_NAME
-      && INTEGRAL_TYPE_P (type)
-      && TREE_TYPE (type))
-    {
-      if (cond_code == LE_EXPR || cond_code == LT_EXPR)
-       {
-         tree type_min = TYPE_MIN_VALUE (type);
-         int cmp = compare_values (limit, type_min);
-
-         /* For < or <= comparisons, if LIMIT is smaller than
-            TYPE_MIN, set the range to VR_VARYING.  */
-         if (cmp == -1 || cmp == 0)
-           {
-             set_value_range_to_varying (vr_p);
-             return;
-           }
-       }
-      else if (cond_code == GE_EXPR || cond_code == GT_EXPR)
-       {
-         tree type_max = TYPE_MIN_VALUE (type);
-         int cmp = compare_values (limit, type_max);
-
-         /* For > or >= comparisons, if LIMIT is bigger than
-            TYPE_MAX, set the range to VR_VARYING.  */
-         if (cmp == 1 || cmp == 0)
-           {
-             set_value_range_to_varying (vr_p);
-             return;
-           }
-       }
-    }
-
   /* Initially, the new range has the same set of equivalences of
      VAR's range.  This will be revised before returning the final
      value.  Since assertions may be chained via mutually exclusive