On Fri, 10 Nov 2023, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > Besides the above question I'd say OK (I assume Josephs reply is a > > general ack from his side). > > Joseph, what are your thoughts on the above?
It's correct not to promote, since that matches the semantics of the standard type-generic macros. (I did suggest in WG14 that the type-generic macros might make more sense in the cases of functions that are genuinely just functions of their integer argument and not of its type, such as population count, than for functions where the result for a given integer argument depends on the width of its type and not just the integer value, or that passing an explicit width argument might be appropriate for type-generic macros in cases where the width matters, but WG14 wanted all the type-generic macros as-is.) -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com
