Subject: Re: [boost] Current Guidance on Compiler Warnings?
From: Gavin Lambert (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-11-28 23:53:09
On 29/11/2018 07:19, Robert Ramey wrote:
> On 11/28/18 8:34 AM, Daniela Engert wrote:
>> Did you actually bother to think about my proposal? I don't want to take
>> away 'int' (as it is specified in the language). I want an *additional*
>> signed integral type with a sane mathematical definition: an abelian
>> group with modulus. And it should offer a widening multiplication N * N
>> -> 2N in addition to the regular one N * N -> N. The compiler should
>> know about this type and lower it's operations to the corresponding
>> hardware instruction (in most cases a single one).
> Would this be of value only in the (special) case where N is a power of
> 2?Â Seems like a very special case to me.Â For such a special case, I'd
> expect to be able to insert some inline assembler to do the job as
> opposed to altering the core language.
Here N is referring to the bit size of the type, which is "always"
(barring weird architectures) a power of two.
It is possible to define such a type as a library, using inline assembly
where possible and with a fallback to a less efficient portable
implementation otherwise. Direct compiler support is not required,
though might be nice.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk