From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id 62E933858C74; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 20:31:21 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 62E933858C74
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1666989081;
	bh=BPLALM8UD0YEMxuk9ikJfS6iuxFE4HfL/LpkLVN4UeM=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=OWmdE8n4L3Ity7SfKC215rxZiNlT9YdjzZ06jwW8nTkyTj2QdNTWlSbguXSj+Xt4a
	 nG3Rrc+1cLWMKd1T0JyMLZW6m4k+UN+/NzPF+LJ2NVXq0CSu8OTYLlEfT6QLxLI1cV
	 pyBzLpWs6/Mltvrkb/5d1vlWbyBJPtOq1acvZV4k=
From: "joseph at codesourcery dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c/102989] Implement C2x's n2763 (_BitInt)
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2022 20:31:21 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c
X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: joseph at codesourcery dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-102989-4-jLOowFnoyf@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-102989-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-102989-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D102989

--- Comment #31 from joseph at codesourcery dot com <joseph at codesourcery=
 dot com> ---
On Fri, 28 Oct 2022, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs wrote:

> I wouldn't go with a new tree code, given semantics are INTEGER_TYPE it s=
hould
> be an INTEGER_TYPE.

Implementation note in that case: bit-precise integer types aren't allowed=
=20
as underlying types for enums, so the code in=20
c-parser.cc:c_parser_enum_specifier checking underlying types:

      else if (TREE_CODE (specs->type) !=3D INTEGER_TYPE
               && TREE_CODE (specs->type) !=3D BOOLEAN_TYPE)
        {
          error_at (enum_loc, "invalid %<enum%> underlying type");

would then need to check that the type isn't a bit-precise type.=