Fix __UINTPTR_TYPE__ definition after r211657

[JF Bastien]

Thanks for fixing. +binji, original author of r211657.


On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 5:24 AM, Justin Holewinski <jholewinski at nvidia.com>
wrote:

>  On Sun, 2014-07-13 at 16:42 -0700, Richard Smith wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 3:10 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger <
> joerg at britannica.bec.de> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> the attached patch ensures that __INTPTR_TYPE__ and __UINTPTR_TYPE__ are
> consistent as the existing logic would pick e.g. long and unsigned int
> on ARM. One issue I found during this is that the NVPTX backend is
> using unsigned types here, which doesn't make sense to me.
>
>
>
>  The change to SemaOverload.cpp looks unrelated? Other than that, this
> LGTM, although I'm a little concerned that it might be intptr_t we were
> getting wrong on some of those targets rather than uintptr_t. Have you
> checked that this gives the same results as GCC?
>
>
> There is no real reason we are using unsigned types for NVPTX, AFAIK.
> Feel free to change it for consistency if needed.
> ------------------------------
>  This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and
> may contain confidential information.  Any unauthorized review, use,
> disclosure or distribution is prohibited.  If you are not the intended
> recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies
> of the original message.
>  ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-commits mailing list
> cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20140714/8727b346/attachment.html>