https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70742
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|andres.tiraboschi@tallertec |unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70742
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||david at westcontrol dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70742
--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener ---
We could implement __builtin_ variants with a different ABI, returning the
quotiend and remainder in a (GCC extension) _Complex int type. The library
would then do
#define div(a, b) ({ div_t res; _Complex
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70742
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70742
--- Comment #12 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
A script that assumes build = host = target is obviously unacceptable.
You can't do any compilations for $target at all when configuring GCC,
only when configuring its runtime libraries su
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70742
--- Comment #11 from Marcos Diaz ---
(In reply to Daniel Gutson from comment #10)
> (In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #8)
> > "The div, ldiv, and lldiv functions return a structure of type div_t,
> > ldiv_t, and lldiv_t, respectively, compris
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70742
--- Comment #10 from Daniel Gutson ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #8)
> "The div, ldiv, and lldiv functions return a structure of type div_t,
> ldiv_t, and lldiv_t, respectively, comprising both the quotient and the
> remainder. The st
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70742
--- Comment #9 from Daniel Gutson
---
Created attachment 38323
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38323&action=edit
sample script to be called from the build system
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70742
--- Comment #8 from Marc Glisse ---
"The div, ldiv, and lldiv functions return a structure of type div_t, ldiv_t,
and lldiv_t, respectively, comprising both the quotient and the remainder. The
structures shall contain (in either order) the member
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70742
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
The compiler would need to provide div_t as a builtin-type. Or the standard
specifies it enough so that layout issues are no worry.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70742
--- Comment #6 from Daniel Gutson
---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #5)
> It seems to me that the reason we don't already have div as a builtin is
> that we need to know the layout of div_t.
>
> In a header, you don't really need inline
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70742
--- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse ---
It seems to me that the reason we don't already have div as a builtin is that
we need to know the layout of div_t.
In a header, you don't really need inline asm:
inline div_t div(int a, int b){ div_t q; q.quot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70742
--- Comment #4 from Daniel Gutson
---
Please assign this to andres.tirabos...@tallertechnologies.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70742
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Gutson
---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Let me reword the summary. what you want is div and ldiv and imaxdiv to be
and lldiv
> supported as a builtin, in that it expands correctly to do the div/mod
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70742
--- Comment #2 from Daniel Gutson
---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Let me reword the summary. what you want is div and ldiv and imaxdiv to be
> supported as a builtin, in that it expands correctly to do the div/mod
> inlined.
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70742
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|U
16 matches
Mail list logo
