Maarten Brock

Maybe leave a comment in bug-716242.c about the removed tests and a pointer to this bug report. We also discussed this on the developer mailing list: https://sourceforge.net/p/sdcc/mailman/message/59421674/ Unfortunately the thread is not tracked on SF correctly. I don't understand SDCC.y enough to be able to assess your patch further. I am also not adamant about keeping or rejecting the (__code *) exception. Both have their virtues.

Maybe leave a comment in bug-716242.c about the removed tests and a pointer to this bug report. We also discussed this on the developer mailing list: https://sourceforge.net/p/sdcc/mailman/message/59421674/ Unfortunately the thread is not tracked on SF correctly. I don't understand SDCC.y enuogh to be able to assess your patch further. I am also not adamant about keeping or rejecting the (__code *) exception. Both have their virtues.

For reference: this was applied in [r4024] by Bernhard.

For reference: this was applied in [r1947] by Johan. [bugs:#496] might be related.

For reference: this was applied in [r1947] by Johan.

Assume that one day we might be testing with other compilers as well. Or we might tell GCC not to use its extensions.

As of [r17086], for many rules, the missing conditions were fixed. At this point, I think it makes sense to close this ticket. You are welcome to redo the analysis at https://github.com/zlfn/alive-sdcc/blob/main/FINDINGS.md using current sdcc trunk, and open a new ticket for the remaining cases.

But this is O(size^2) with the for j loop.