Re: [RFC] > WIDE_INT_MAX_PREC support in wide-int

2023-08-29 Thread Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 11:42:48AM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote: > > I'll note tree-ssa-loop-niter.cc also uses GMP in some cases, widest_int > > is really trying to be poor-mans GMP by limiting the maximum precision. > > I'd characterise widest_int as "a wide_int that is big enough to hold > al

Re: [RFC] > WIDE_INT_MAX_PREC support in wide-int

2023-08-29 Thread Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 09:49:59AM +, Richard Biener wrote: > The simplest way would probably to keep widest_int at > WIDE_INT_MAX_PRECISION like we have now and assert that this is > enough at ::to_widest time (we probably do already). And then > declare uses with more precision need to use

Re: [RFC] > WIDE_INT_MAX_PREC support in wide-int

2023-08-29 Thread Richard Sandiford via Gcc-patches
Just some off-the-cuff thoughts. Might think differently when I've had more time... Richard Biener writes: > On Mon, 28 Aug 2023, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > >> Hi! >> >> While the _BitInt series isn't committed yet, I had a quick look at >> lifting the current lowest limitation on maximum _BitInt p

Re: [RFC] > WIDE_INT_MAX_PREC support in wide-int

2023-08-29 Thread Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
On Mon, 28 Aug 2023, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > While the _BitInt series isn't committed yet, I had a quick look at > lifting the current lowest limitation on maximum _BitInt precision, > that wide_int can only support wide_int until WIDE_INT_MAX_PRECISION - 1. > > Note, other limits if that

[RFC] > WIDE_INT_MAX_PREC support in wide-int

2023-08-28 Thread Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches
Hi! While the _BitInt series isn't committed yet, I had a quick look at lifting the current lowest limitation on maximum _BitInt precision, that wide_int can only support wide_int until WIDE_INT_MAX_PRECISION - 1. Note, other limits if that is lifted are INTEGER_CST currently using 3 unsigned cha