> I think a patch is more useful once believe feature-complete, which > means replacing the __int128 support with the new mechanism.
One of the side-effects of taking out the existing __int128 support is that __int128 isn't in the integer_type_kind list, so isn't a type that is usable for constants. This breaks int128-4.C, which assumes a 128-bit integer constant. If I add generic support for intN types in i_t_k[], then we'll get (for example) 20-bit constants, which might not be what we want. The only other option is to special-case __int128 if we find it in the __intN list. Thoughts? Also, I noted a few tests check for the int128-specific error message when the type is not supported, but as per our previous discussion, the __int128 keyword just doesn't exist if the type isn't supported. Do we need to discern between "not supported with these options" and "not supported ever" ?
