This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: __int256
On Fri, 13 Jul 2012, Mike Stump wrote:
> I don't have time to re-implement __int128 support in the compiler for
> you.
>
> So, are there any other specific actionable things I can do for you to
> make the patch acceptable?
No. The right way to make __int256 support - the feature, not the present
patch at all - acceptable for me is a series of incremental patches
converting the existing __int128 support to use hooks for the target to
define what __intN types it has without the architecture-independent
compiler needing to hardcode the details of those types. You might push
on whoever added __int128 support to add testcases for it - tests that
__int128 works as expected including execution of all the usual C integer
operations as well as __int128 being accecpted and rejected in the right
contexts - since such tests are unfortunately missing. Having such tests
would both help validate that a reworking of __int128 support does not
cause regressions, as well as being a possible basis to add tests of
__int256.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com