Revisiting the TYPE_IS_SIZETYPE issue

[Eric Botcazou]

> So my assertion is that if with the proposed scheme we can always
> re-associate, all the optimizations that were asked for for
> TYPE_IS_SIZETYPE types can be applied without making TYPE_IS_SIZETYPE types
> special in the middle-end.  Just the frontend would chose the initial
> kind of operation to note if overflow may happen or not.

OK, thanks for clarifying; yes, I think this would be OK.

-- 
Eric Botcazou