This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: SIGN_EXTRACT feature, perhaps
- To: law at cygnus dot com
- Subject: Re: SIGN_EXTRACT feature, perhaps
- From: Richard Henderson <rth at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 02:57:36 -0700
- Cc: Alasdair Baird <alasdair at wildcat dot demon dot co dot uk>, egcs-bugs at egcs dot cygnus dot com
- References: <19990407023539.A9381@cygnus.com> <4370.923477934@upchuck>
On Wed, Apr 07, 1999 at 03:38:54AM -0600, Jeffrey A Law wrote:
> > No. SIGN_EXTRACT is read-only. ZERO_EXTRACT as a destination is
> > a bitfield insertion, and as such it doesn't matter about sign,
> > so we just worry about the one.
> I hate to disagree with you, but.... Note carefully "they may appear
> on the left side of an assignment". Perhaps you're confusing them with
> zero/sign_extend which only appear in a source operand.
No, I wasn't confusing sign_extend -- but I am surprised to see
sign_extract documented as a destination. I thought we only used
zero_extract for that.
r~