From: already5chosen@yahoo.com

On Sat, 29 Nov 2025 22:58:26 +0000
bart  wrote:

> On 29/11/2025 20:24, Waldek Hebisch wrote:
> >
> > First, _BitInt(821) (and _BitInt(1187)) are really unimportant.  You
> > simple get them as a byproduct of general rules.
>
> That they are allowed is the problem. People use them and expect the
> compiler to waste its time generating bit-precise code.
>

I fail to see the difficulty for implementer.
For arithmetic ops, _BitInt(1187) is almost the same as _BitInt(1216).
You just add one 'and by constant' operation applied to MS word at the
very end. You only have do it for unsigned variant, since for signed
variant overflow is undefined, anyway. So, for signed, you can do
nothing or you can do the same as unsigned, if you fill that it's
simpler.
The same goes for left shift.
For right shift and for logical ops,  _BitInt(1187) is exactly the same
as _BitInt(1216).
So what is all the fuss about?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
 * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)