On Dec 31, 2005, at 9:26 PM, Paul Schlie wrote:
be able define NULL as being some value other than 0.
Do you have a specific chip in mind you want to do this for? Why
would you want to do this? How many users would benefit from having
done this?
- enable the specification of arithmetic pointer and integer overflow
semantics, not limited to invoking an undefined or modulo
results, as
being able to support saturating integer arithmetic optimization
seems
increasingly attractive as signal processing becomes more pervasive.
Yes, but you didn't answer my other two question. Anyway, what
hardware does only saturating arithmetic? If it does both, would you
want + to be saturating? If so, why? How would you then want to get
non-saturating arithmetic?
Saturating arithmetic is a good example of where the code should use
a specialized form to denote the operation, and that form then makes
the code completely portable, so, I cannot fathom why you'd want it
in this class.
What compilers do this today? What code bases do this today?
If none and none, why would we want to?
We don't yet have a clue why you want this, could you give us the
real reason. Theoretic beauty? You wanna sell a chip that does this
and have a compiler for it? You want to define a new language
because you think it'd be cool? You want gcc to match the needs of
DSP programmers better?
- enable the specification of the result/behavior of a shift greater
than the width of a operand
This one I actually understand.
