On Mon, 2 Sep 2013, Richard Sandiford wrote:
Kenneth Zadeck <zadeck@naturalbridge.com> writes:
There is no place for exactly two HWIs in the machine independent parts
of the compiler,
I totally agree. In fact I was taking that so much for granted that
I didn't even think to add a rider about it, sorry. I didn't mean
to imply that we should keep double_int around.
I think the reason for doing this is to prove that it can be done
(so that the wide_int code isn't too big a change for the tree level)
and to make it easier to merge the wide-int patches into trunk piecemeal
if we need to.
Note that changing the tree rep to non-double_int is easy. Also note
that I only want 'double_int' to stay around to have a fast type
that can work on two HWIs for the code that need more precision
than a HWI. The only important cases I know of are in
get_inner_reference and get_ref_base_and_extent and friends. Those
are heavily used (and the only double-int function callers that
even show up in regular cc1 profiles).
So if wide_int_fixed<2> ('2' better be replaced with
'number-that-gets-me-twice-target-sizetype-precision')
works for those cases then fine (and we can drop double-ints).