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: Need advice with store_bit_field and its call chain


Jim Wilson <wilson@specifixinc.com> writes:

> On Mon, 2003-10-27 at 17:44, Zack Weinberg wrote:
>> Could you please look at what I and Graham ended up putting in
>> store_bit_field/extract_bit_field, and tell me if you think it's
>> correct?  It is not exactly the same as this, but I think it ought to
>> have the same effect.
>
> You added patches to check for GET_MODE_BITSIZE () != 0.  That avoids
> the bootstrap error, but I don't think it is as good as my suggestion. 
> The code here should be looking at the size of a mode, not its
> precision, which is why I think using GET_MODE_SIZE instead of
> GET_MODE_BITSIZE is the proper test.  I can't think of any case where
> the current code would fail to work though.

Would you mind making and testing a patch to use GET_MODE_SIZE
instead, then?

zw


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