http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53100
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse 2012-05-01
12:47:03 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> and not to introduce them just before an optimization that removes them.
Usually, doing (long)num1*(__int128)(long)num2 does the right thing. I tried in
the e
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53100
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse 2012-04-29
08:42:36 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> On the other hand, tree-vrp does have the information that the
> differences are in [-4294967295, 4294967295], which comfortably fits in a type
> half the size
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53100
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse 2012-04-29
08:05:59 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> It would be convenient if I
> could just write the whole code with __int128 and let the compiler do the
> optimization by tracking the range of numbers.
The t
