From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21189 invoked by alias); 22 Feb 2010 23:56:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 21041 invoked by uid 48); 22 Feb 2010 23:56:21 -0000 Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 23:56:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20100222235621.21040.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug c/43128] [4.5 Regression] c-c++-common/pr41779.c doesn't work In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "manu at gcc dot gnu dot org" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-02/txt/msg02274.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #18 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-22 23:56 ------- (In reply to comment #17) > suggest having a c_ep_convert_and_check or similar function that handles > excess precision: it would take the result type, the semantic result type > (the type that gets used eventually to build an EXCESS_PRECISION_EXPR) and > the value to convert. It would just call convert_and_check, ignoring the > semantic type, *except* when the operand has integer type *and* the > semantic type is non-NULL; in that case, it would first convert to the > semantic type them to the result type. Wouldn't that change the normal result of promotion rules? Also, why call convert_and_check ignoring the semantic type and not just call convert? The excess precision type should be large enough to not cause any problem that needs checking. > -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43128