Mike Stump <mikest...@comcast.net> writes: > On Nov 20, 2013, at 5:58 AM, Richard Sandiford > <rsand...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: >> I've committed a patch upstream to convert TREE_INT_CST_LOW to >> tree_to_[su]hwi >> if there is an obvious tree_fits_[su]hwi_p guard. > > So, in general, I like putting them on trunk, and then merging them into > the branch. When that is done, the difference disappears without the > removal of the difference. If one misses one, then it does't magically > disappear. If one changes it in a manner that is different than the > branch, the change then shows up as a conflict to resolve. Also, when > that is done, we can then just see the actual changes you are making, > instead of those intermixed into random changes that made it to trunk > and random ones that did not.
I don't get what you're trying to say. I _did_ put the changes I want to keep on trunk, and merged them back to the branch so that the remaining TREE_INT_CST_LOW->tree_to_* changes stood out. The remaining branch changes weren't obvious without some justification and are independent of what we're doing in wide-int. Which is why I asked permission to revert them on the branch and leave them to be handled separately. As I said, the patch is still here, so it's not like the work is lost. >> The patch also undoes a couple of other ordering and whitespace differences. > > So, for example, these changes are just dropped on the floor. :-( I > picked them up, and put them into trunk. I can't tell which other > patches are also so dropped that I might think are important. That's why I'm posting the patches for review, so you can see and comment. Thanks, Richard
