On 06/30/2011 11:01 AM, Sebastian Pop wrote:
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 10:03, Richard Guenther wrote:
But what do you do for
for (unsigned char i = 128; i< 255; ++i)
? You change 128 to -128 which is wrong.
Yes, 128 gets translated to -128.
And 255 gets translated to -1.
And so the loop i
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 10:03, Richard Guenther wrote:
> But what do you do for
>
> for (unsigned char i = 128; i < 255; ++i)
>
> ? You change 128 to -128 which is wrong.
Yes, 128 gets translated to -128.
And 255 gets translated to -1.
And so the loop iteration domain gets translated in the pol
On Thu, 30 Jun 2011, Sebastian Pop wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 09:57, Sebastian Pop wrote:
> >> Canonically extended according to TYPE_UNSIGNED I mean. So what you
> >> do is always create signed mpzs - that should simply work without
> >> doing anything to the double-int. Thus, why not do
On Thu, 30 Jun 2011, Sebastian Pop wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 09:46, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > On Thu, 30 Jun 2011, Sebastian Pop wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 05:19, Richard Guenther wrote:
> >> > That looks odd. So you given -1U as input you sign-extend that to -1
> >>
> >>
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 09:57, Sebastian Pop wrote:
>> Canonically extended according to TYPE_UNSIGNED I mean. So what you
>> do is always create signed mpzs - that should simply work without
>> doing anything to the double-int. Thus, why not do
>>
>> static inline void
>> tree_int_to_gmp (tree
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 09:46, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Jun 2011, Sebastian Pop wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 05:19, Richard Guenther wrote:
>> > That looks odd. So you given -1U as input you sign-extend that to -1
>>
>> correct
>>
>> > and then set the mpz to -1ULLL.
>>
>> and
On Thu, 30 Jun 2011, Sebastian Pop wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 05:19, Richard Guenther wrote:
> > That looks odd. So you given -1U as input you sign-extend that to -1
>
> correct
>
> > and then set the mpz to -1ULLL.
>
> and then it sets the mpz to signed -1, given that I'm passing false
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 05:19, Richard Guenther wrote:
> That looks odd. So you given -1U as input you sign-extend that to -1
correct
> and then set the mpz to -1ULLL.
and then it sets the mpz to signed -1, given that I'm passing false to UNS:
/* Sets RESULT to VAL, taken unsigned if UNS is t
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011, Sebastian Pop wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This patch fixes PR47653 by sign extending the double int constants
> before converting them to a GMP value. There still are some places
> where we should not sign extend the values converted: upper bounds of
> unsigned types should for example
