This is the mail archive of the 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: Fix powerpc64 g77

| > If that does happen, then it is a bug (in the compiler).
| Why would that be a bug?

Precily because of this:

| There should be integer-manipulation
| routines that abstract away from these representation details so that
| we do not need any kind of conditional.
Well, that's not so much a bug as a missing feature.  I think we all
agree that some abstract integer-manipulation routines would be a great
addition to GCC.  That would simplify a lot of things.

But, we can't expect David to do that today.

Actually, since the path is known at compile time to be dead, I don't
think the compiler should be issueing such diagnostic about the runtime
I disagree -- and I don't know of any other compilers that work as
you suggest.

The whole point of using run-time conditionals is to allow the compiler
to issue errors and warnings about pieces of code that we would otherwise
not compile -- thereby preventing build failures for people with
machines different from our own.

Mark Mitchell      
CodeSourcery, LLC  

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