From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 110781 invoked by alias); 1 Aug 2018 10:32:37 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 110690 invoked by uid 89); 1 Aug 2018 10:32:31 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=liking X-HELO: mail-lj1-f181.google.com Received: from mail-lj1-f181.google.com (HELO mail-lj1-f181.google.com) (209.85.208.181) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Aug 2018 10:32:29 +0000 Received: by mail-lj1-f181.google.com with SMTP id q127-v6so16399385ljq.11 for ; Wed, 01 Aug 2018 03:32:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=dMiqiW6I2HPJe7Ir82DzlBddy5lxvvRHkZjPcQ/DLQY=; b=JBGfEBn6z6AC41nFOh65iOUo3VMh7RAkDhZv1hRhu8jY0CDJBg0SDN+hYtjHWL10Tf VhKU5TMhag/P+XE80b3Kn46EjB8lMYJvirA+0zBe5hgNDKD+Sa5MTgbuHKoMEaYiacrI Ggr3RIePlBlR7PbLDwIeY781KMr9h4AJAtEtl42cpZBjSoItYifdF3pku8FlDSiuLh4f HuZX5K6Mlui3akukCXFLJoDhty9o40Pgqke9BI41dQC5rVeeWy/cACvq7YvA17C3qLE9 LtrSSq2GSVs+sdKVKigh2qbRMNu02acNXHvzJUSrKd4z7o9Gto8ZNVtQX/sL7ob+xDhf Tqxw== MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <870b9190-3784-964f-f2f8-7250e3e3bcc4@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <870b9190-3784-964f-f2f8-7250e3e3bcc4@redhat.com> From: Richard Biener Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2018 10:32:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: abstract remaining wide int operations in VRP To: Aldy Hernandez Cc: GCC Patches Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2018-08/txt/msg00032.txt.bz2 On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 9:09 AM Aldy Hernandez wrote: > > ...well, most of them anyhow... > > I got tired of submitting these piecemeal, and it's probably easier to > review them in one go. > > There should be no difference in functionality, barring an extra call to > set_and_canonicalize_value_range (instead of set_value_range) due to the > way I've organized multiplication and lshifts for maximal sharing. This > also gets rid of some repetitive stuff. > > I've also added a value_range::dump like wide_int::dump. It makes > debugging a lot easier. > > My next patch will move all the wide_int_range_* stuff into > wide-int-range.[hc]. > > I'm really liking how this is turning out, BTW: a *lot* cleaner, less > code duplication, and shareable to boot :). > > OK pending one more round of tests? Only coarsely reviewed the big patch but the result looks nice. Thus, OK. Thanks, Richard. > Aldy