On 3 May 2025 13:53:02 CEST, Richard Biener <richard.guent...@gmail.com> wrote: >On Sat, May 3, 2025 at 1:44 PM Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> On Sat, May 03, 2025 at 01:32:35PM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: >> > Any reason for unsigned long long vs. uint64_t for the following? >> > >> > - size_t attr; // See cbl_field_attr_t >> > + unsigned long long attr; // See cbl_field_attr_t >> >> Because it needs to be handled the same by the compiler, and it was easier >> to use ULONGLONG, "attr" than figure out what exact type uint64_t has. >> The C FE has >> if (UINT64_TYPE) >> c_uint64_type_node = uint64_type_node = >> TREE_TYPE (identifier_global_value (c_get_ident (UINT64_TYPE))); >> but the COBOL FE doesn't have that. >> For aliasing etc. reasons I'm afraid we can't use >> build_nonstandard_integer_type (64, 1); > >Ah, I was hoping the stdint type nodes were initialized by the middle-end.
no, each fe has that dance one way or the other. hmz > >Richard. > >> >> Jakub >>
