Re: Comments on the suggestion to use infinite precision math for wide int.

[Robert Dewar <dewar at adacore dot com>]

On 4/8/2013 7:46 PM, Kenneth Zadeck wrote:
> On 04/08/2013 06:45 PM, Robert Dewar wrote:
> > On 4/8/2013 6:34 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> > > On Apr 8, 2013, at 2:48 PM, Robert Dewar <dewar@adacore.com> wrote:
> > > > That may be so in C, in Ada it would be perfectly reasonable to use
> > > > infinite precision for intermediate results in some cases, since the
> > > > language standard specifically encourages this approach.
> > >
> > > gcc lacks an infinite precision plus operator?!  :-)
> > Right, that's why we do everything in the front end in the
> > case of Ada. But it would be perfectly reasonable for the
> > back end to do this substitution.
> but there is no way in the current tree language to convey which ones
> you can and which ones you cannot.

Well the back end has all the information to figure this out I think!
But anyway, for Ada, the current situation is just fine, and has
the advantage that the -gnatG expanded code listing clearly shows in
Ada source form, what is going on.
>