Re: [Sim] Patch to sim/common/cgen-ops.h

[Doug Evans <dje at transmeta dot com>]

Ben Elliston writes:
 >     > Why is CGEN follow the GCC convention of SI, UI, BI, ZI, NFI, rather
 >     > than the sim-common convention of signed8, unsigned64, ...
 > 
 >    'cus cgen rtl is based on gcc rtl and I like having the types be the
 >    same in the emitted code as in the rtl.
 > 
 > I think Andrew was asking why the rtl uses these names.  Using other names
 > for the modes would not preclude the use of an rtl, it just wouldn't look
 > like GCC's.  Is that a bad thing, given that it would allow the programmer
 > to be more explicit about data representation on the target side?

Andrew may have just been refering to the name choice used in the
generated code.  Either way, this is just a naming choice issue.
I like the current scheme.