On Fri, October 21, 2011 00:08, Richard Trieu wrote: > On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 2:53 PM, Richard Smith <[email protected]>wrote: >> On Thu, October 20, 2011 22:06, Richard Trieu wrote: >>> Update Clang to not complain when printing IntegerLiterals with type >>> short, unsigned short, __int128_t, or __uint128_t. This will fix PR11179. >>> >>> PR: >>> http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=11179 >>> >>> >>> Patch also located at: >>> http://codereview.appspot.com/5309045/ >> >> For __int128_t and __uint128_t, the approach looks fine (though the printed >> value should include the "i128" or "Ui128" suffix). > > Are those the correct suffixes? Clang and gcc doesn't recognize them as > valid integer constant suffixes.
You need -fms-extensions to enable it. Without that extension, there's no way to write an __int128_t literal. >> For short and unsigned short, it seems to me that this is a bug in >> Sema::BuildExpressionFromIntegralTemplateArgument: we shouldn't be creating >> IntegerLiteral AST nodes with those types (or with negative values, for >> that matter). > > Why can't an integer literal be short or negative? That's just how the C language family works: there's no way of writing an integer literal which is negative or short. Richard _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
