public inbox for gcc@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Geoff Keating <geoffk@cygnus.com>
To: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28@cam.ac.uk>
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: 128-bit integers and intmax_t
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 14:44:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <jm7l89z7s0.fsf@envy.cygnus.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0009182153020.18463-100000@kern.srcf.societies.cam.ac.uk>

"Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28@cam.ac.uk> writes:

> 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?

This is a libc issue.  They are extended integer types if and only if
the libc defines intmax_t (or some other standard type) as them.
Otherwise, there's no way for a strictly conforming C program to know
they exist.

-- 
- Geoffrey Keating <geoffk@cygnus.com>

      reply	other threads:[~2000-09-18 14:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2000-09-18 14:14 Joseph S. Myers
2000-09-18 14:44 ` Geoff Keating [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=jm7l89z7s0.fsf@envy.cygnus.com \
    --to=geoffk@cygnus.com \
    --cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=jsm28@cam.ac.uk \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).