This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [ping] Re: c_common_type_for_mode: pass precision, not mode
- From: Jeffrey A Law <law at redhat dot com>
- To: DJ Delorie <dj at redhat dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 09:44:42 -0700
- Subject: Re: [ping] Re: c_common_type_for_mode: pass precision, not mode
- Organization: Red Hat, Inc
- References: <200412160346.iBG3kv9q011598@greed.delorie.com> <200501080334.j083YNjO011659@greed.delorie.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <200502220042.j1M0gLvc019492@greed.delorie.com>
- Reply-to: law at redhat dot com
On Mon, 2005-02-21 at 19:42 -0500, DJ Delorie wrote:
> I'm back from vacation...
> > > > 2004-12-15 DJ Delorie <email@example.com>
> > > >
> > > > * c-common.c (c_common_type_for_mode): Pass the mode's precision
> > > > to make_[un]signed_type, not the mode itself.
> > Presumably this bootstrapped and comparison tested? If so, then it's
> > fine (the code in mainline right now is clearly incorrect).
> > Do you have a testcase? Even if it only triggers on the internal port
> > it would be good to get the test added to the testsuite.
> There were a number of libgcc sources that triggered this. I wouldn't
> think a separate testcase would be needed, but I can try to write a
> simple one if you want.
In that case, no need for a separate test.