This is the mail archive of the gcc@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]

Re: Revisiting the TYPE_IS_SIZETYPE issue

From: kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu (Richard Kenner)
To: richard dot guenther at gmail dot com
Cc: ebotcazou at adacore dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 09:48:22 EDT
Subject: Re: Revisiting the TYPE_IS_SIZETYPE issue
References: <200805261047.59798.ebotcazou@adacore.com> <84fc9c000805260204u776b667aq3496de8a628b321a@mail.gmail.com> <200805271037.11379.ebotcazou@adacore.com> <84fc9c000805270149s37865b77r7a86a241f1a3b209@mail.gmail.com>

> Well, this goes back to the question what TYPE_IS_SIZETYPE semantics
> are ;)  I guess it would be a sort-of "sticky" 'does not overflow'
> flag?

No.  I would say it's closer to "don't even *think* about overflow on
operations of this type".

References:
- Revisiting the TYPE_IS_SIZETYPE issue
  - From: Eric Botcazou
- Re: Revisiting the TYPE_IS_SIZETYPE issue
  - From: Richard Guenther
- Re: Revisiting the TYPE_IS_SIZETYPE issue
  - From: Eric Botcazou
- Re: Revisiting the TYPE_IS_SIZETYPE issue
  - From: Richard Guenther

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]