On Tue, 2014-04-22 at 08:58 -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 04/22/2014 08:52 AM, Josh Stone wrote:
> So in total:
>
> struct { signed int i:7; } __s = { .i = __b };
> (var) |= (typeof (var)) __s.i * ((typeof (var)) 1 << ((nth) * 7));
>
> Better?
Yes, that's what I had in mind.
Excellent. I changed the patch as attached. No undefined behavior
detected, all tests PASS.
Thanks,
Mark