[cfe-dev] [RFC] Proposing an Extended Integer Type

[Jon Chesterfield via cfe-dev]

>
> C’s promotion rules are unfortunate for almost everything :-).
>

plus:


> 2) Go for strict equivalent with no promotion rules, requiring everything
> to be explicit.
>

suggest that we would have a significant number of users of _ExtInt with 32
or 64 bit width. I'd cheerfully replace uint64_t with _ExtInt(64) (or
however it's spelled) everywhere.

I also know of an isa which would have loved a twelve bit integer as an
argument to an intrinsic as the instruction itself did 12 bit wrapping
arithmetic.

Thanks
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20200206/f1d5bfc8/attachment.html>