This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: 32->64 bit cross compilers
- To: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Subject: Re: 32->64 bit cross compilers
- From: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
- Date: 03 May 2001 09:01:31 -0300
- Cc: janis at us dot ibm dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Richard Kenner <kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu>
- Organization: GCC Team, Red Hat
- References: <orlmoo6c7y.fsf@guarana.lsd.ic.unicamp.br><20010425115754D.mitchell@codesourcery.com><or66fsxjdt.fsf@guarana.lsd.ic.unicamp.br><20010426100336Z.mitchell@codesourcery.com>
On Apr 26, 2001, Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com> wrote:
>> Re-installed 2001-01-09's patch:
>> * hwint.h (HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT, HOST_WIDE_INT): Use long long
>> if it's wider than long and the target's long is wider than the
>> host's.
> Yes, this is OK. Thanks.
> What do you suggest doing for the branch?
How about installing the CONST_INT sign-extension fixes, but not the
stricter checks? Then, we could install this patch in the branch too?
> I think we don't want the CONST_INT sign-extension patches at this
> point.
All of them are relatively obvious bug-fixes. It's only the strict
checks that may expose hidden bugs that we might want to keep hidden
in the branch.
--
Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer aoliva@{cygnus.com, redhat.com}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist *Please* write to mailing lists, not to me