On 10/19/12, Richard Biener <richard.guent...@gmail.com> wrote: > The existing tree_low_cst function performs checking, so > tree_to_hwi should as well. > > I don't think mismatch of signedness of the variable assigned to > with the sign we use for hwi extraction is any good. C++ isn't > type-safe here for the return value but if we'd use a reference > as return slot we could make it so ... (in exchange for quite > some ugliness IMNSHO): > > void tree_to_shwi (const_tree tree, HOST_WIDE_INT &hwi); > > vs. > > void tree_to_uhwi (const_tree tree, unsigned HOST_WIDE_INT &hwi); > > maybe more natural would be > > void hwi_from_tree (HOST_WIDE_INT &hwi, const_tree tree); > void hwi_from_tree (unsigned HOST_WIDE_INT &hwi, const_tree tree); > > let the C++ bikeshedding begin! (the point is to do appropriate > checking for a conversion of (INTEGER_CST) tree to HOST_WIDE_INT > vs. unsigned HOST_WIDE_INT)
We could add conversion operators to achieve the effect. However, we probably don't want to do so until we can make them explicit. Unfortunately, explicit conversion operators are not available until C++11. > No, I don't want you to do the above transform with this patch ;) -- Lawrence Crowl
