[MLIR] Fix an assert that contains a mistake in conditional operator #95668
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is described in (N2) https://pvs-studio.com/en/blog/posts/cpp/1126/ so caught by the PVS Studio analyzer.
Warning message -
V502 Perhaps the '?:' operator works in a different way than it was expected. The '?:' operator has a lower priority than the '+' operator. LoopEmitter.cpp 983
V502 Perhaps the '?:' operator works in a different way than it was expected. The '?:' operator has a lower priority than the '+' operator. LoopEmitter.cpp 1039
The assert should be
assert(bArgs.size() == reduc.size() + (needsUniv ? 1 : 0));
since + has higher precedence and ? has lower.
This further can be reduce to
assert(aArgs.size() == reduc.size() + needsUniv);
because needUniv is a bool value which is implicitly converted to 0 or