From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10646 invoked by alias); 20 Mar 2003 22:19:27 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 10637 invoked from network); 20 Mar 2003 22:19:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nile.gnat.com) (205.232.38.5) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 20 Mar 2003 22:19:27 -0000 Received: from gnat.com (darwin.gnat.com [205.232.38.44]) by nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 120CEF28CE; Thu, 20 Mar 2003 17:19:27 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 23:18:00 -0000 Subject: Re: RFA: Ada variable-sized objects, bit_size_type == TImode, and divti3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org To: "Ulrich Weigand" From: Geert Bosch In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <02AD3AA5-5B22-11D7-9722-00039344BF4A@gnat.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg01317.txt.bz2 On Thursday, Mar 20, 2003, at 15:58 America/New_York, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > However, I'm wondering: > > - does bit_size_type really need to be TImode Richard Kenner would be best qualified to answer this, but he is out of town until tuesday. > - if so, shouldn't these special cases be implemented more efficiently > somewhere (we divide by an integer constant 8 here) This would be nice, but I'm not sure this is most pressing. It seems unlikely to me that the constructs generating these long divisions would occur in performance-sensitive code. In general, for 64-bit arithmetic operations on 32-bit targets, there are many cases where one of the operands is constant and simpler code code be generated inline instead. > - in general, are we really supposed to need TImode division > How does this work on other 64-bit platforms? Other 64-bit platforms define TImode division. -Geert