On Mar 26, 2012, at 4:57 PM, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Mar 26, 2012, at 1:03 PM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>> I think:
>> 
>> ...copies of the top bit.  Note however that values are neither inherently
>> signed nor inherently unsigned; where necessary, signedness is determined
>> by the rtl operation instead.
> 
> Sounds good to me, changed.

Oh, review caught one last problem:

> +, however values are neither signed nor unsigned.
> +All operations defined on such constants define the signededness.

This was edit cruft from the last rewording for the doc, the cruft has been removed.