On Fri, 20 Dec 2013, DJ Delorie wrote: > > I think using the macros for type sizes is fine, and float / vector / > > complex types are completely irrelevant to this (so standard_type_bitsize > > should maybe be standard_integer_type_bitsize). > > Whew. Am I missing any in the previous code snippet (char, short, > int, long, long long) ? Those were the ones documented in tm.texi.
That's the correct list. > > No, the (TImode, __int128) pair should be handled the same way as all the > > other __intN types rather than special-cased (of course you should ensure > > the patch does not end up changing the set of configurations for which > > __int128 is available). > > So if a target happened to set "long long" to TImode, it wouldn't have > __int128 any more? I'm wondering if any ILP64 target would be > affected (x86-64 isn't, I don't think any others are). No existing target defines LONG_LONG_TYPE_SIZE to more than 64. -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com
