On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 11:30 PM, Marc Glisse <marc.gli...@inria.fr> wrote: > On Sun, 12 Aug 2012, Diego Novillo wrote: > >> This implements the double_int rewrite. >> >> See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-08/msg00711.html for >> details. >> >> Diego. > > > I am taking it as a chance to ask a couple questions about the coding > conventions. > > >> 2012-08-12 Lawrence Crowl <cr...@google.com> >> >> * hash-table.h >> (typedef double_int): Change to struct (POD). >> (double_int::make): New overloads for int to double-int >> conversion. > > > Isn't that double_int::from_* now? > >> +typedef struct double_int >> { > > [...] >> >> } double_int; > > > Does the coding convention say something about this verbosity? > > >> + HOST_WIDE_INT to_signed () const; >> + unsigned HOST_WIDE_INT to_unsigned () const; >> + >> + /* Conversion query functions. */ >> + >> + bool fits_unsigned() const; >> + bool fits_signed() const; > > > Space before the parentheses or not? > > >> +inline double_int & >> +double_int::operator ++ () >> +{ >> + *this + double_int_one; > > > *this += double_int_one; > would be less confusing.
Increment/decrement operations did not exist, please do not add them at this point. Richard. >> + return *this; >> +} > > > -- > Marc Glisse
