On 8/10/21 8:40 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 08:02:24AM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
The whole point is that this data type is only used for interfaces, as
shown in the example code. Nobody wants to define const void as
anything. The const serves only as a contract tha
On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 08:02:24AM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> The whole point is that this data type is only used for interfaces, as
> shown in the example code. Nobody wants to define const void as
> anything. The const serves only as a contract that the pointed-to
> object, no matter what
On 8/10/21 7:48 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 07:17:54AM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
On 8/9/21 6:44 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
This is not a documented GCC extension either, and it might even
conflict with the existing void * extension (allowing arithmetic on it,
by de
On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 07:17:54AM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> On 8/9/21 6:44 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >This is not a documented GCC extension either, and it might even
> >conflict with the existing void * extension (allowing arithmetic on it,
> >by defining sizeof(void)). In either case i
On 8/9/21 6:44 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
This is not a documented GCC extension either, and it might even
conflict with the existing void * extension (allowing arithmetic on it,
by defining sizeof(void)). In either case it is not currently defined.
I'm not sure how you get to this, bu
On Mon, Aug 09, 2021 at 02:18:48PM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> >>"const void" is meaningless, and maybe even invalid C. I think the code
> >>is wrong, not (just) the documentation! This wants to be
> >>void *const
> >>but it is
> >>const void *
> >>as far as I can see?
> >>
> >>As I said
Hi Segher,
+ pcvoid_type_node
+= build_pointer_type (build_qualified_type (void_type_node,
+ TYPE_QUAL_CONST));
A const void? Interesting. You are building a pointer to a const void
here, not a const pointer to void. Is that what you wanted?
On Sun, Aug 08, 2021 at 03:53:01PM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> On 8/8/21 3:27 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >Okido. What about the signed char though?
>
> Sorry, forgot to address that. There are two reasons to keep it as is:
> (a) It matches what we have in the old support, and (b) it make
Hi...
On 8/8/21 3:27 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
Hi!
On Sun, Aug 08, 2021 at 11:53:38AM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
On 8/6/21 7:01 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 08:30:50AM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
+ const vsc __builtin_altivec_abss_v16qi (vsc);
+ABSS_V16QI alt
Hi!
On Sun, Aug 08, 2021 at 11:53:38AM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> On 8/6/21 7:01 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 08:30:50AM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> >>+ const vsc __builtin_altivec_abss_v16qi (vsc);
> >>+ABSS_V16QI altivec_abss_v16qi {}
> >>+
> >>+ const vsi __
Hi Segher,
On 8/6/21 7:01 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
Hi!
On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 08:30:50AM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
+ const vsc __builtin_altivec_abss_v16qi (vsc);
+ABSS_V16QI altivec_abss_v16qi {}
+
+ const vsi __builtin_altivec_abss_v4si (vsi);
+ABSS_V4SI altivec_abss_v4si {}
Hi!
On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 08:30:50AM -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> + const vsc __builtin_altivec_abss_v16qi (vsc);
> +ABSS_V16QI altivec_abss_v16qi {}
> +
> + const vsi __builtin_altivec_abss_v4si (vsi);
> +ABSS_V4SI altivec_abss_v4si {}
> +
> + const vss __builtin_altivec_abss_v8hi (v
2021-06-10 Bill Schmidt
gcc/
* config/rs6000/rs6000-builtin-new.def: Finish altivec stanza.
* config/rs6000/rs6000-call.c (rs6000_init_builtins): Move
initialization of pcvoid_type_node here...
(altivec_init_builtins): ...from here.
* config/rs6000/rs6000
13 matches
Mail list logo
