https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71473
--- Comment #6 from tprince at computer dot org ---
__sec_reduce_{min,max}_ind in Intel cilk(tm) plus don't give good performance,
so one may suspect they are using size_t.(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from
comment #5)
> While this started with my commit, the actual bug is there from the start of
> Cilk+ support.
> The __sec_reduce_* builtins are declared with int return type, which doesn't
> actual match what they return (it is in this case the type of the argument).
> I bet the current way to deal with this is handle those in
> resolve_overloaded_builtin and turn them into internal functions or
> something similar and resolve the return type at that point.
> The question is what to do with templates if the arguments are type
> dependent.
> Another thing that is weird is that the __sec_reduce_{min,max}_ind return
> int, I would have expected size_t or something more appropriate for array
> indexes. Does Cilk+ really mandate int in that case? How can it be used on
> a very large array then?
