Re: TCE target nonconforming definition of long long and intmax_t

2021-12-08 Thread Pekka Jääskeläinen via cfe-commits
Hi Aaron, Indeed the 32b TCE target is not fully compliant in this aspect; its 64b emulation support is not complete, therefore we advertise only these 32b limits. We have an in-progress 64b target where the limits are 64b, but it's not upstreamed yet. Yes, TCE target is still maintained, but it

Re: TCE target nonconforming definition of long long and intmax_t

2021-12-08 Thread Aaron Ballman via cfe-commits
On Wed, Dec 8, 2021 at 2:20 AM Pekka Jääskeläinen wrote: > > Hi Aaron, > > Indeed the 32b TCE target is not fully compliant in this aspect; > its 64b emulation support is not complete, therefore we advertise > only these 32b limits. We have an in-progress 64b target where the > limits are 64b, but

TCE target nonconforming definition of long long and intmax_t

2021-12-07 Thread Aaron Ballman via cfe-commits
Hello! I was digging around in stdint.h to do some implementation work on C2x and I noticed that the TCE target seems to be nonconforming. In C17, the implementation limits for intmax_t and uintmax_t are specified by 7.20.2.5 as: — minimum value of greatest-width signed integer type INTMAX_MIN -(