[GSoC] generation of Gimple loops with empty bodies

[Tobias Grosser]

On 16/07/2014 11:40, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 5:45 PM, Tobias Grosser <tobias@grosser.es> wrote:
>> This is not a patch review, lets move this to gcc@gcc.gnu.org.
>>
>>
>> On 15/07/2014 17:03, Roman Gareev wrote:
>>>
>>> I've found out that int128_integer_type_node and
>>> long_long_integer_type_node are NULL at the moment of definition of
>>> the graphite_expression_size_type. Maybe we should use
>>> long_long_integer_type_node, because, as you said before, using of
>>> signed 64 has also been proved to be very robust. What do you think
>>> about this?
>>
>>
>> I do not fully understand this message. You first say that
>> long_long_integer_type_node is NULL, but then want to use this. This does
>> not seem to be a solution. Most likely it is the solution, but the problem
>> description makes it hard to understand it. Is the problem
>> caused by initialization order issues? Or why are such types NULL?
>
> Because they are not available on all targets or for all languages.
>
> I suggest you use the largest available integer mode via
> mode = mode_for_size (MAX_FIXED_MODE_SIZE, MODE_INT, 0);
> type = build_nonstandard_integer_type (GET_MODE_PRECISION (mode), [01]);

Roman, can you give this a shot?

Cheers,
Tobias