committed as revision 204987.
thanks
kenny
On 11/18/2013 05:38 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Fri, 15 Nov 2013, Kenneth Zadeck wrote:
This patch fixes a number of places where the mode bitsize had been used but
the mode precision should have been used. The tree level is somewhat sloppy
about
On Fri, 15 Nov 2013, Kenneth Zadeck wrote:
>
> This patch fixes a number of places where the mode bitsize had been used but
> the mode precision should have been used. The tree level is somewhat sloppy
> about this - some places use the mode precision and some use the mode bitsize.
> It seems th
This patch fixes a number of places where the mode bitsize had been used
but the mode precision should have been used. The tree level is
somewhat sloppy about this - some places use the mode precision and some
use the mode bitsize. It seems that the mode precision is the proper
choice sinc
On 11/15/2013 04:07 AM, Eric Botcazou wrote:
this code from fold-const.c starts on line 13811.
else if (TREE_INT_CST_HIGH (arg1) == signed_max_hi
&& TREE_INT_CST_LOW (arg1) == signed_max_lo
&& TYPE_UNSIGNED (arg1_type)
/* We will flip the si
> this code from fold-const.c starts on line 13811.
>
> else if (TREE_INT_CST_HIGH (arg1) == signed_max_hi
> && TREE_INT_CST_LOW (arg1) == signed_max_lo
> && TYPE_UNSIGNED (arg1_type)
> /* We will flip the signedness of the comparison operator
>
On 11/14/13 09:16, Kenneth Zadeck wrote:
in doing the wide int conversion, i have found the following code on the
trunk which seems somewhat suspect:
this code from fold-const.c starts on line 13811.
else if (TREE_INT_CST_HIGH (arg1) == signed_max_hi
&& TREE_INT_CST_LOW
in doing the wide int conversion, i have found the following code on the
trunk which seems somewhat suspect:
this code from fold-const.c starts on line 13811.
else if (TREE_INT_CST_HIGH (arg1) == signed_max_hi
&& TREE_INT_CST_LOW (arg1) == signed_max_lo
&& TYP
