aykevl added a comment.
I'm not sure whether `native_int` is any clearer than just `int`. I'm afraid it
only introduces more complexity ("What's `native_int`? Oh, it's just `int`").
Perhaps a controversial idea: what about changing to use stdint.h types?
`si_int` -> `int32_t`
`su_int` -> `uint32_t`
`di_int` -> `int64_t`
etc
These types are clearly defined and immediately recognizable. The meaning is,
as far as I can see, exactly the same (`si_int` etc seems to be a leftover from
GCC internal naming conventions, such as `SImode`).
Also note that the libgcc documentation does not always reflect the real world.
For example, `__divmodsi4` on AVR libgcc has a very different signature: it
returns both the division result and the remainder in registers.
================
Comment at: compiler-rt/lib/builtins/int_lib.h:112
-uint32_t __inline __builtin_ctz(uint32_t value) {
+int __inline __builtin_ctz(uint32_t value) {
unsigned long trailing_zero = 0;
----------------
Why `int` and not `native_int` here?
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D81285/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D81285
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
