On Sep 9, 2013, at 4:49 PM, Mike Stump <mikest...@comcast.net> wrote: >> I don't see how it can be appropriate here; my impression >> is that this code should never fail for any compiler input,
Oh, I might have missed what you meant by this… If so, sorry… The nicest of options would be to generate a libcall for the missing operation… if we do that, then there would be no failure to compile and we can expect the runtime to put the operation in.
