Hi, > On 09/20/2011 10:19 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote: >> + if (explicit_int128 && pedantic && ! in_system_header) >> + pedwarn (input_location, OPT_pedantic, >> + "ISO C++ does not support %<__int128%> for %qs", name); > > Yep, like that. But we also want the check for null integer128_type_node.
Thanks, I'll finalize the patch later today. Actually I was pretty sure that the check wasn't strictly necessary, ie, we reject __int128 anyway if isn't really available (ie, my first try didn't ice on the testcase without the dg-require on x86_64 -m32) But maybe it's matter of producing a clearer diagnostic? I'll double check.. Thanks, Paolo
