--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
guile-2.0.12: Comparison is always true warning - may cause problems. |
|
Date: |
Thu, 6 Oct 2016 22:49:20 +0200 |
I get the following warnings, when building on Mac OS X.
(It should show up for all platforms, though):
In file included from
/Users/jens/open-source/Source/guile-2.0.12/libguile/numbers.c:9731:
/Users/jens/open-source/Source/guile-2.0.12/libguile/conv-integer.i.c: In
function 'scm_to_int8':
/Users/jens/open-source/Source/guile-2.0.12/libguile/conv-integer.i.c:94:
warning: comparison is always true due to limited range of data type
/Users/jens/open-source/Source/guile-2.0.12/libguile/conv-integer.i.c:94:
warning: comparison is always true due to limited range of data type
In file included from
/Users/jens/open-source/Source/guile-2.0.12/libguile/numbers.c:9747:
/Users/jens/open-source/Source/guile-2.0.12/libguile/conv-integer.i.c: In
function 'scm_to_int16':
/Users/jens/open-source/Source/guile-2.0.12/libguile/conv-integer.i.c:94:
warning: comparison is always true due to limited range of data type
/Users/jens/open-source/Source/guile-2.0.12/libguile/conv-integer.i.c:94:
warning: comparison is always true due to limited range of data type
Notice that it's only from line 94, which reads...
if (n >= TYPE_MIN && n <= TYPE_MAX)
... looking at the top of the file, it says: "It is only for signed types", so
I look in ...
numbers.c:9731
numbers.c:9747
... which is int8 and int16 (signed integers); this should be as intended.
The variable 'n' is declared as scm_t_signed_bits, which is a scm_t_intptr,
which is an intptr_t, which is just a 'long'.
So my guess is that the problem must be with TYPE_MIN and TYPE_MAX.
In numbers.c, line 9742, they're defined as follows:
#define TYPE scm_t_int16
#define TYPE_MIN SCM_T_INT16_MIN
#define TYPE_MAX SCM_T_INT16_MAX
... looks good to me, but where's the definition of SCM_T_INT16_MIN and
SCM_T_INT16_MAX ?
-It seems to be in __scm.h:
#define SCM_I_UTYPE_MAX(type) ((type)-1)
#define SCM_I_TYPE_MAX(type,umax) ((type)((umax)/2))
#define SCM_I_TYPE_MIN(type,umax) (-((type)((umax)/2))-1)
#define SCM_T_UINT8_MAX SCM_I_UTYPE_MAX(scm_t_uint8)
#define SCM_T_INT8_MIN SCM_I_TYPE_MIN(scm_t_int8,SCM_T_UINT8_MAX)
#define SCM_T_INT8_MAX SCM_I_TYPE_MAX(scm_t_int8,SCM_T_UINT8_MAX)
#define SCM_T_UINT16_MAX SCM_I_UTYPE_MAX(scm_t_uint16)
#define SCM_T_INT16_MIN SCM_I_TYPE_MIN(scm_t_int16,SCM_T_UINT16_MAX)
#define SCM_T_INT16_MAX SCM_I_TYPE_MAX(scm_t_int16,SCM_T_UINT16_MAX)
Now, this is where things get interesting. The macros are cool, but I think the
use seems to be incorrect.
Let's try an example (SCM_T_INT16_MIN):
SCM_T_INT16_MIN = SCM_I_TYPE_MIN(scm_t_int16,SCM_T_UINT16_MAX)
Expands to ...
SCM_T_INT16_MIN = (-((scm_t_int16)((-1)/2))-1)
... which can be cleaned up ...
SCM_T_INT16_MIN = (-(((-1)/2))-1)
A signed integer of value -1 divided by 2, is the same as bitshifting to the
right by using ASR; the result will be -1.
SCM_T_INT16_MIN = (-(((-1)))-1)
SCM_T_INT16_MIN = (-((-1))-1)
SCM_T_INT16_MIN = (-(-1)-1)
SCM_T_INT16_MIN = (+1-1)
SCM_T_INT16_MIN = (0)
... Ehm ... Did I do something wrong ?
I expected the value -32768, but got 0.
Wouldn't it be correct to typecast as scm_t_uint16 instead of scm_t_int16 (and
thus scm_t_uint8 instead of scm_t_int8) ?
Love
Jens
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
Re: bug#24630: guile-2.0.12: Comparison is always true warning - may cause problems. |
|
Date: |
Wed, 01 Mar 2017 10:18:28 +0100 |
|
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) |
Hi,
On Thu 06 Oct 2016 22:49, Jens Bauer <address@hidden> writes:
> I get the following warnings, when building on Mac OS X.
> (It should show up for all platforms, though):
>
> In file included from
> /Users/jens/open-source/Source/guile-2.0.12/libguile/numbers.c:9731:
> /Users/jens/open-source/Source/guile-2.0.12/libguile/conv-integer.i.c: In
> function 'scm_to_int8':
> /Users/jens/open-source/Source/guile-2.0.12/libguile/conv-integer.i.c:94:
> warning: comparison is always true due to limited range of data type
> /Users/jens/open-source/Source/guile-2.0.12/libguile/conv-integer.i.c:94:
> warning: comparison is always true due to limited range of data type
These are not really bugs. I mean, we shouldn't produce warnings, but
GCC doesn't warn on these, so clearly there is a heuristic which clang
has set differently; but the actual code is fine.
In your investigations below there are some errors. I include a couple
of inline comments for your enjoyment.
> In file included from
> /Users/jens/open-source/Source/guile-2.0.12/libguile/numbers.c:9747:
> /Users/jens/open-source/Source/guile-2.0.12/libguile/conv-integer.i.c: In
> function 'scm_to_int16':
> /Users/jens/open-source/Source/guile-2.0.12/libguile/conv-integer.i.c:94:
> warning: comparison is always true due to limited range of data type
> /Users/jens/open-source/Source/guile-2.0.12/libguile/conv-integer.i.c:94:
> warning: comparison is always true due to limited range of data type
>
> Notice that it's only from line 94, which reads...
> if (n >= TYPE_MIN && n <= TYPE_MAX)
>
> ... looking at the top of the file, it says: "It is only for signed types",
> so I look in ...
>
> numbers.c:9731
> numbers.c:9747
> ... which is int8 and int16 (signed integers); this should be as intended.
>
> The variable 'n' is declared as scm_t_signed_bits, which is a scm_t_intptr,
> which is an intptr_t, which is just a 'long'.
>
> So my guess is that the problem must be with TYPE_MIN and TYPE_MAX.
>
> In numbers.c, line 9742, they're defined as follows:
> #define TYPE scm_t_int16
> #define TYPE_MIN SCM_T_INT16_MIN
> #define TYPE_MAX SCM_T_INT16_MAX
>
> ... looks good to me, but where's the definition of SCM_T_INT16_MIN and
> SCM_T_INT16_MAX ?
> -It seems to be in __scm.h:
>
> #define SCM_I_UTYPE_MAX(type) ((type)-1)
> #define SCM_I_TYPE_MAX(type,umax) ((type)((umax)/2))
> #define SCM_I_TYPE_MIN(type,umax) (-((type)((umax)/2))-1)
>
> #define SCM_T_UINT8_MAX SCM_I_UTYPE_MAX(scm_t_uint8)
> #define SCM_T_INT8_MIN SCM_I_TYPE_MIN(scm_t_int8,SCM_T_UINT8_MAX)
> #define SCM_T_INT8_MAX SCM_I_TYPE_MAX(scm_t_int8,SCM_T_UINT8_MAX)
>
> #define SCM_T_UINT16_MAX SCM_I_UTYPE_MAX(scm_t_uint16)
> #define SCM_T_INT16_MIN SCM_I_TYPE_MIN(scm_t_int16,SCM_T_UINT16_MAX)
> #define SCM_T_INT16_MAX SCM_I_TYPE_MAX(scm_t_int16,SCM_T_UINT16_MAX)
>
> Now, this is where things get interesting. The macros are cool, but I think
> the use seems to be incorrect.
>
> Let's try an example (SCM_T_INT16_MIN):
> SCM_T_INT16_MIN = SCM_I_TYPE_MIN(scm_t_int16,SCM_T_UINT16_MAX)
> Expands to ...
> SCM_T_INT16_MIN = (-((scm_t_int16)((-1)/2))-1)
SCM_T_UINT16_MAX expands to ((scm_t_uint16)-1) which expands to the
uint16_t value 0xffff. (These intermediate expansions have type in
addition to value.) SCM_T_INT16_MIN is -(0xffff/2)-1, which is
(int16_t)-0x8000.
> ... which can be cleaned up ...
>
> SCM_T_INT16_MIN = (-(((-1)/2))-1)
>
> A signed integer of value -1 divided by 2, is the same as bitshifting to the
> right by using ASR; the result will be -1.
>
> SCM_T_INT16_MIN = (-(((-1)))-1)
> SCM_T_INT16_MIN = (-((-1))-1)
> SCM_T_INT16_MIN = (-(-1)-1)
> SCM_T_INT16_MIN = (+1-1)
> SCM_T_INT16_MIN = (0)
>
> ... Ehm ... Did I do something wrong ?
> I expected the value -32768, but got 0.
>
> Wouldn't it be correct to typecast as scm_t_uint16 instead of scm_t_int16
> (and thus scm_t_uint8 instead of scm_t_int8) ?
>
Happy hacking,
Andy
--- End Message ---