On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 08:46:42AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: > On Fri, 1 Jun 2018, Joseph Myers wrote: > > > On Fri, 1 Jun 2018, Michael Meissner wrote: > > > > > I'm wondering if there are other suggestions to make this patch > > > acceptable. > > > > > > As I mentioned previously, the initialization process needs to go through > > > all > > > of the widening tables in order to initialize all FP types, so we can't > > > just > > > arbitrarily eliminate IFmode from the widening table. > > > > Initialization that's meant to cover all floating-point modes logically > > should not rely on everything being reachable by the "wider" relation. > > > > That is, I'd expect it to do something equivalent to > > FOR_EACH_MODE_IN_CLASS (mode, MODE_FLOAT) rather than something based on > > "wider". > > The unfortunate thing is that all iterators are wrapped around > the "wider" relationship - we do not have any other way to find > related modes. So the concept that all modes in a class can be > ordered after their width is baked in very deeply. That's IMHO > something we need to eventually fix to avoid this kind of > target-hook "hacks". > > Richard.
Given the related modes are in sequential order now, I could imagine ways to do the initialization and iterators using those values. -- Michael Meissner, IBM IBM, M/S 2506R, 550 King Street, Littleton, MA 01460-6245, USA email: meiss...@linux.ibm.com, phone: +1 (978) 899-4797
