Thanks for fixing. +binji, original author of r211657.
On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 5:24 AM, Justin Holewinski <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, 2014-07-13 at 16:42 -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, 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 > [email protected] > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits > >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
