This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: bitfields: types vs modes?
- From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- To: DJ Delorie <dj at redhat dot com>
- Cc: iant at google dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 18:09:21 -0700
- Subject: Re: bitfields: types vs modes?
- References: <200903100433.n2A4XKNL011948@greed.delorie.com> <200904010511.n315Ba28010006@greed.delorie.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <49DA30F0.email@example.com> <200904062003.n36K3WHc001273@greed.delorie.com> <49DA689F.firstname.lastname@example.org> <200905201948.n4KJmv4N017890@greed.delorie.com> <email@example.com> <4A14715C.firstname.lastname@example.org> <200905202132.n4KLWhUN020072@greed.delorie.com> <4A14EE51.email@example.com> <200907142010.n6EKAWVR013169@greed.delorie.com>
DJ Delorie wrote:
>>>> I think the ARM specification is pretty sensible, and would make a
>>>> good cross-platform approach.
> I finally got the last of the feedback I needed from our customers,
> and they agree that the AAPCS functionality is suitable for their
> ports as well.
> What's the next step?
At the risk of being naive: implement it. I'm not quite sure what
you're looking for here?
I'd assume that we should try to do some of this at the tree->rtl
conversion point, in a platform-independent manner, but I'm not an
expert on those bits.
(650) 331-3385 x713