This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
Hi, it is in nature very similar to what I tried back in tree-ssa branch time, but I was never so successful to get it close to bootstrapland, so we seem to be improving in this respect. > > - conversions from integer to pointer types (and vice versa). > I'd like to enforce extension/truncation to be done in integer > type only and not allow (T *)short for example, but require > (T *)(sizetype)short. [the same would hold true for ENUMERAL_TYPE > and BOOLEAN_TYPE, but I didn't try what the fallout from this would be]
I just wonder what benefits are here for enforcing the sizetype conversion here?
The only really problematic case is conversion of a pointer to an integer type with larger precision. There we don't know whether to sign- or zero-extend. But as Andrew said - this (and the less interesting cases) are not happening too often.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |