This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC build failed with your patch on 2001-01-09T11:35:00Z.
- To: rth at redhat dot com
- Subject: Re: GCC build failed with your patch on 2001-01-09T11:35:00Z.
- From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001 14:13:25 -0800
- Cc: dje at watson dot ibm dot com, aoliva at redhat dot com, geoffk at redhat dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-regression at gcc dot gnu dot org, grahams at redhat dot com, jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk, mhayes at redhat dot com, neil at daikokuya dot demon dot co dot uk, osk at hem dot passagen dot se
- Organization: CodeSourcery, LLC
- References: <mark@codesourcery.com><200101092050.PAA38976@mal-ach.watson.ibm.com><20010109135807.A4380@redhat.com>
>>>>> "Richard" == Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com> writes:
>> Because some targets are runtime selectable between 32-bits
>> and 64-bits, this is not limited to targets of a particular
>> width or cross-compilers. Targetting a different width is a
>> subset of a cross-compiler. The hwint.h decision depends upon
>> MAX_LONG_TYPE_SIZE which is the maximum of the runtime
>> selectable values.
Richard> The class of targets for which I consider the patch to be
Richard> incorrect are 32-bit natives for which there is a runtime
Richard> selectable 64-bit variant -- PA, MIPS, and PowerPC.
Why is the patch incorrect for these targets? Isn't bitsizetype still
128 bits wide here?
--
Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com