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


Hi,

On Thu, 11 Oct 2007, Richard Kenner wrote:

> > Yes, and that's arguably a bug.  I don't see any reasons why the values 
> > in TYPE_SIZE should be of a type with these properties instead of being a 
> > simple internal unsigned integer type.
> 
> You lost me here.  What are "these properties"?  And you can't have it be
> unsigned in cases when some of the values might be negative!

"these properties" are those which you and Eric expected sizetype to have, 
and where we then had this very thread to actually try and spell out the 
properties, i.e. those properties which you initially "defined" as "all 
optimizations are allowed".  We later came up with the overflow_ignored 
property IIRC, but I'm still arguing that we probably don't need that for 
our sizetypes.  You still weren't able to show a testcase where it 
matters I believe.


Ciao,
Michael.


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