Re: [PATCH] lower-bitint: Fix .{ADD,SUB,MUL}_OVERFLOW with _BitInt large/huge INTEGER_CST arguments [PR113003]

On Thu, 14 Dec 2023, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > Hi! > > As shown in the testcase, .{ADD,SUB,MUL}_OVERFLOW calls are another > exception to the middle/large/huge _BitInt discovery through SSA_NAMEs > next to stores of INTEGER_CSTs to memory and their conversions to > floating point. > The calls can

[PATCH] lower-bitint: Fix .{ADD,SUB,MUL}_OVERFLOW with _BitInt large/huge INTEGER_CST arguments [PR113003]

Hi! As shown in the testcase, .{ADD,SUB,MUL}_OVERFLOW calls are another exception to the middle/large/huge _BitInt discovery through SSA_NAMEs next to stores of INTEGER_CSTs to memory and their conversions to floating point. The calls can have normal COMPLEX_TYPE with INTEGER_TYPE elts return