[llvm-dev] Problem with Aarch64 ?

[Tim Northover via llvm-dev]

On 8 September 2016 at 10:22, Somenath Chakraborty <some.chak at gmail.com> wrote:
> Was there any specific reason to take the opposite path (from x86) ? - Just
> curious to know.

Not that I know of. The decision would have been made when ARM was
primarily used in pretty embedded situations, long before x86
compatibility was something to even think about.

In that context you could argue that unsigned makes more sense for
typical bit-banging that goes on ("a << 8 | b" etc), but I have no
idea if anyone actually did argue that or they just tossed a coin.

Cheers.

Tim.