On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 04:42:13PM -0700, Richard Smith wrote: > On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 3:10 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger <[email protected] > > 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,
Yeah, test hack left-over in the tree. > 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? That's why I CC'ed the owner of the NVPTX backend. I don't know if this is really the desired behavior or not. Joerg _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
