This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [RFC] SHIFT_COUNT_TRUNCATED and shift_truncation_mask
- From: Richard Biener <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
- To: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Robin Dapp <rdapp at linux dot ibm dot com>, Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com>, "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Richard Sandiford <richard dot sandiford at arm dot com>
- Date: Tue, 14 May 2019 08:56:12 +0200
- Subject: Re: [RFC] SHIFT_COUNT_TRUNCATED and shift_truncation_mask
- References: <CAFULd4Y5xmJaHO=T4fuZU3sSqsx49SdsvzXDNdpFBdjSS_dFXQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAFiYyc2X9dJq4_NwY=JsaJnOrua7SfH23Pu7HDmZ3V6O3ek+Kg@mail.gmail.com> <4487f6fb-80f3-3c2f-04be-9dda381efe6f@linux.ibm.com> <mptef52n71u.fsf@arm.com> <829d246a-c189-09cc-53f5-d6a716d5a13d@redhat.com>
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 8:29 PM Jeff Law <law@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On 5/13/19 1:32 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> >
> > IMO we should only consider deprecating the macro. I'm not sure how
> > much practical effect that will have though. cc0 was deprecated ages
> > ago but we're a still a long way from getting rid of it. :-)
> Yea, but (in theory) removing SHIFT_COUNT_TRUNCATED from a target ought
> to be easier than removing cc0.
Contrary to cc0 you can simply "remove" SHIFT_COUNT_TRUNCATED and
things keep working, just eventually regress in code quality. But we all know
that removing hack^Wthings from GCC is hard (adding them is not so).
Richard.
>
> jeff