From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Joseph S. Myers" To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: 128-bit integers and intmax_t Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 14:14:00 -0000 Message-id: X-SW-Source: 2000-09/msg00416.html When HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT >= 64, gcc has some support for 128-bit integer types (`int __attribute__((__mode__(__TI__)))' and `unsigned int __attribute__((__mode__(__TI__)))'). Should these count as "extended integer types" (within the meaning of C99 6.2.5p7)? If they so count, then intmax_t and uintmax_t would need to be defined accordingly - which would break existing ABIs (e.g. glibc), and the dependence on HOST_BITS_PER_WIDE_INT would be rather undesirable. The pragmatic solution seems to be to define that these types are not extended integer types, regardless of the level of support GCC has for them and how much they look like extended integer types, and to add appropriate -pedantic warnings, but does anyone see any better solution? -- Joseph S. Myers jsm28@cam.ac.uk