Just a stylistic thing, but since the only use of "wone" is in the eq_p, it'd be simpler just to use "1". Also, the maximum value is better calculated as "wi::max_value (prec, SIGNED)". So:/* Compute the value of SSIZE_MAX, the largest positive value that can be stored in ssize_t, the signed counterpart of size_t . */ wide_int ssize_max = wi::max_value (prec, SIGNED); return wi::eq_p (min, 1) && wi::geu_p (max, ssize_max);
Thanks, I didn't know about the implicit conversion or the max_value API. I'll remember to use them the next time. FWIW, going slightly off topic, and while I'm sure it's a matter of getting used to the design, I can't say I find the wide_int classes exactly intuitive. It seems that the most natural way to write the return statement in C++ is: return min == 1 && max >= ssize_max; The first subexpression is accepted but the second one doesn't even compile. If it did, it would treat the operands as signed which isn't what I need here. One still has to resort to the clunky predicate for it: return min == 1 && wi::geu_p (max, ssize_max); It also doesn't help that the names of the predicates don't follow the same convention as those that operate on trees (e.g., eq_p vs tree_int_cst_equal). Unless there's some inherent limitation that makes it impossible to use the class the way I would like it might be worth investing some time into making it more user-friendly. Martin
