https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117266
--- Comment #3 from H. Peter Anvin <hpa at zytor dot com> --- On October 22, 2024 1:33:33 PM PDT, "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: >https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117266 > >Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: > > What |Removed |Added >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED > Resolution|--- |INVALID > >--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> --- >>(b) is guaranteed to be unavailable for the largest integer type supported, >>which is machine- and compiler-dependent. > > >Well if all targets get their act together with respect to the ABI, then >_BitInt will be supported and there is a guarantee. > >So yes _BitInt solves this. > It does not solve the abstract type problem, nor the division problem.
