Re: [PATCH] Properly build integer constants

2011-05-02 Thread H.J. Lu
On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 8:11 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Richard Guenther wrote: >> >> There is a scary comment before build_int_cst_type why build_int_cst >> can't be sane.  Fortunately it is not true.  If it were there would >> be other code to be fixed. >> >> Bootstr

Re: [PATCH] Properly build integer constants

2011-04-24 Thread H.J. Lu
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Richard Guenther wrote: > > There is a scary comment before build_int_cst_type why build_int_cst > can't be sane.  Fortunately it is not true.  If it were there would > be other code to be fixed. > > Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied to

Re: [PATCH] Properly build integer constants

2011-04-22 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 09:27:50PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote: > There is a scary comment before build_int_cst_type why build_int_cst > can't be sane. Fortunately it is not true. If it were there would > be other code to be fixed. > > Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, appli

[PATCH] Properly build integer constants

2011-04-22 Thread Richard Guenther
There is a scary comment before build_int_cst_type why build_int_cst can't be sane. Fortunately it is not true. If it were there would be other code to be fixed. Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, applied to trunk. Richard. 2011-04-22 Richard Guenther * tree.c (b