On 17 December 2010 17:54, Andreas Färber <andreas.faer...@web.de> wrote: > Am 17.12.2010 um 17:48 schrieb Peter Maydell: >> On the types issue, at the moment softfloat uses "int32" etc for >> "a handy type holding at least 32 bits", and "bits32" for "exactly >> 32 bits". So I guess changing the 'bits' types to the POSIX int32_t >> and friends would be straightforward enough, but what does your >> patch do with the int32 types? > > My patch does not touch the bits* types. I didn't notice any problem there. > > I replaced int32 by int32_t, int64 by int64_t etc. No sane code puts more > than 32 bits into an "int32" variable, and my guests on OSX/ppc64 host still > appeared to work. I don't have arm guests though so please check on your > side.
Hrm. That introduces potential semantic changes, so I'm a bit wary of it (and my test suite is not currently comprehensive enough to be sure of covering all of softfloat)... I'd be happier if we just renamed the int32 & friends to some other non-clashing name, if all we're trying to solve is a name clash issue. -- PMM
