On Wed, 15 Apr 2009, DJ Delorie wrote: > > yes; however, maybe it would be easier to wait till Richard finishes the > > work on not representing the overflow semantics in types (assuming that's > > going to happen say in a few weeks?), which should make the fix > > unnecessary, > > Another thought - is this bug in the 4.4 branch? If so, a 4.4 fix may > be needed too.
Note that the issue is with our representation of POINTER_PLUS_EXPR which insists on using sizetype for the pointer offset argument (where I don't remember if m32c uses a bigger or smaller mode for sizetype than for pointers). Whenever the sizes of the modes for pointers and sizetype do not match we have a problem. Note that while this particular issue may likely be fixed with the no-undefined-overflow branch work the above much general issue is _not_ fixed by it. Richard.
