On Thu, 21 Aug 2014, DJ Delorie wrote: > > Maybe you need to refactor __glibcxx_digits so there is a version > > taking the bitsize as an argument rather than using sizeof(T) * > > __CHAR_BIT__, but that should be the only change needed to handle > > such types with the existing macros. > > Since the other macros use this macro, we'd need a complete second set > of macros just for the __intN types anyway, each of which takes a
Well, the existing macros would be defined in terms of the new ones. > bitsize and passes it down. Since gcc already knows all the right > answers for the __intN types and needs to emit other macros for them > anyway, where's the benefit? The more predefined macros there are, the more impact on startup time (though I don't have any specific figures). -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com
