This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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: __int256

From: Mike Stump <mikestump at comcast dot net>
To: Georg-Johann Lay <avr at gjlay dot de>
Cc: gcc-patches Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 16:01:52 -0700
Subject: Re: __int256
References: <F6BB9A78-51C3-43BF-8A2C-13D1E5415760@comcast.net> <50004AD4.6000605@gjlay.de>

On Jul 13, 2012, at 9:20 AM, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
>> We have another patch underway to do N-bit constant ints, where N is defined
>> by the port.  This patch is in the process of being reviewed now, and Kenny
>> should be able to submit it shortly.
> 
> The avr port defines __int24 and __uint24.
> Is that compatible with a generic __int24?

A 24-bit int is smaller than a HOST_WIDE_INT (right!), so the everything related to 24-bit constants is handled by existing CONST_INT code.  Our patch doesn't change 24-bit constants.

I've never seen a generic __int24, so I don't know what you mean, and I don't know what you mean by compatible.  In the language standard, compatible is a very specific term, and it relates to the front-end code.  I'm not altering or changing any front end semantics for any type, other than __int256, so the answer post my patch, is the same answer as previous to my patch.

I hope that might answer your question, if not, expound on the question a little and I can try again.

References:
- __int256
  - From: Mike Stump
- Re: __int256
  - From: Georg-Johann Lay

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