From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20524 invoked by alias); 18 Aug 2011 22:59:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 20514 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Aug 2011 22:59:41 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mel.act-europe.fr (HELO mel.act-europe.fr) (194.98.77.210) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 22:59:27 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-smtp.eu.adacore.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CC96CB016C; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 00:59:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mel.act-europe.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.eu.adacore.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XYncFhiMFn6Y; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 00:59:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.1.2] (bon31-9-83-155-120-49.fbx.proxad.net [83.155.120.49]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mel.act-europe.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11788CB023D; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 00:59:17 +0200 (CEST) From: Eric Botcazou To: Richard Guenther Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] Fix sizetype "sign" checks Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 07:10:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <201108190100.09992.ebotcazou@adacore.com> Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2011-08/txt/msg01542.txt.bz2 > Looking at the Ada case I believe this happens because > Ada has negative DECL_FIELD_OFFSET values (but that's > again in sizetype, not ssizetype)? Other host_integerp > uses in Ada operate on sizes where I hope those are > never negative ;) Yes, the Ada compiler uses negative offsets for some peculiar constructs. Nothing to do with the language per se, but with mechanisms implemented in gigi to support some features of the language. > Eric, any better way of fixing this or would you be fine with this patch? Hard to say without seeing the complete patch and playing a little with it. -- Eric Botcazou