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: __intN patch 3/5: main __int128 -> __intN conversion.


On 10/02/2014 02:00 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
Ah, good point.  In which case I don't see what this code is trying to
accomplish relative to falling through to the "prefer the unsigned one"
code below.  Shall we just remove it?

I don't know for sure.  There was __int128 code there, I replaced it
with the "same" code, so as to avoid any functional differences on
mainstream targets.

I imagine the code is there for when __int128 is the same size as some
other types besides long long.

But if __int128 happened to be the same size as long the code was wrong. Well, I suppose it could be there to prefer __int128 to intTI_type_node. I guess let's move the intN handling below the code for (u)long and add support for unsigned extended integers like there is for both long and long long.

Jason


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