This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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: [PATCH] Fix optimization regression in constant folder


Richard Kenner wrote:
>> It's true that this is a different type from size_t, the user-visible
>> type.  The latter is just a typedef for some unsigned integral type, and
>> might be wider than sizetype, and might not have other special
>> properties of sizetype, whatever those might be.
> 
> No, I think it's required that it's the same size, and possibly signedness,
> as size_t

Why?  I understand that's usually the way it is, but (to my knowledge)
nothing in C says that I can't have a 16-bit address space and a 32-bit
size_t.  Why should DECL_SIZE be a 32-bit type in that case?  Anyhow,
that's probably an academic question; in practice, they are the same.

-- 
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
mark@codesourcery.com
(650) 331-3385 x713


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