[patch, libgfortran] Some more transformational intrinsic speedups

[Tobias Schlüter]

FX wrote:
>>  Without looking at the details of Thomas' patch I think intptr_t is the
>> right type, i.e. an integer type that is defined to always be wide enough to
>> contain a pointer.
> 
> uintptr_t (the unsigned type) seems more appropriate here. But are we
> guaranteed it is defined? When I used intptr_t in the past (in
> intrinsics/signal.c and runtime/backtrace.c) I've defined a macro
> depending on HAVE_INTPTR_T.

FAIK it's required by C99, and the library is built with a C99 compiler, 
i.e. gcc.  But one of my assumptions may be wrong, and it may make sense 
to fall back to unsigned long if !HAVE_INTRPTR_T.

Cheers,
- Tobi

-- 
Tobias Schlüter
Am Coulombwall 1, Zi. 326
85748 Garching b. München
Tel.: +49/89/289-14139