This is the mail archive of the gcc@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: [C++11] Reclaiming fixed-point suffixes for user-defined literals.


On Tue, 8 Nov 2011, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Nov 2011, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
>
> > (yes, that's you cue. :)  For acceptance, IMHO better get it
> > working universally by open-coding the implementation without
> > requiring --enable-* options.
>
> Making something involving new types - and so ABI impact - universal
> without actually agreeing the ABI for each target with appropriate ABI
> maintainers or interest groups for that target is not a good idea.  It
> leads to ABI incompatibility with other compilers, and to inefficient and
> poorly specified ABIs that are "whatever GCC happens to implement if you
> don't think about it" like we have on several targets for complex
> types....

I'd hope ABI issues would be solved trivially by mapping to the
same-sized integer type, the one ISTR you mentioned would be a
good idea to keep before lowering the operations ;) but I guess
I see your point.

brgds, H-P


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