[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Tinycc-devel] win32 port
From: |
Philippe Ribet |
Subject: |
Re: [Tinycc-devel] win32 port |
Date: |
Thu, 14 Oct 2004 11:24:24 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040413 Debian/1.6-5 |
TK wrote:
< unsigned long long n, n1;
---
uint64_t n, n1;
It's ok. BTW, Fabrice, if you're intrested, I can offer you macro which defines
intxx_t types for compilers who don't defines it.
< if ((n & 0xffffffff00000000LL) != 0) {
---
if ((n & ((int64_t)0xffffffff00000000)) != 0) {
This code is wrong. You try to cast into int64_t in order to get some 64 bits
value, this means you consider you have a 32 bits one. If the constant is 32
bits, this means you lost half the bits and the cast won't recover them.
The good definition is: if ((n & INT64_C(0xffffffff00000000)) != 0) {
The definitions I proposed defines INTxx_C too for old compilers which
use their own syntax.
Best regards,
--
Philippe Ribet
The README file said
"Requires Windows 95, NT 4.0, or better."
So... I installed it on Linux!
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] Some patches, Fabrice Bellard, 2004/10/02
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] Some patches, Peter Busser, 2004/10/05
- [Tinycc-devel] win32 port, Fabrice Bellard, 2004/10/07
- RE: [Tinycc-devel] win32 port, TK, 2004/10/14
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] win32 port, Fabrice Bellard, 2004/10/14
- [Tinycc-devel] glibc non c99?, Mike Partin, 2004/10/14
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] glibc non c99?, Philippe Ribet, 2004/10/14
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] glibc non c99?, Mike Partin, 2004/10/14
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] glibc non c99?, Fabrice Bellard, 2004/10/14
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] glibc non c99?, Mike Partin, 2004/10/14
- Re: [Tinycc-devel] glibc non c99?, David Hovemeyer, 2004/10/14