On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 01:33:48PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 01:01:58PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > I just followed:
> > https://www.gnu.org/savannah-checkouts/gnu/gettext/manual/html_node/Plural-forms.html
> >
> > "About larger integer types, such as ‘uintmax_t’ or ‘unsigned long long’:
> > they can be
> > handled by reducing the value to a range that fits in an ‘unsigned long’.
> > Simply
> > casting the value to ‘unsigned long’ would not do the right thing, since it
> > would
> > treat ULONG_MAX + 1 like zero, ULONG_MAX + 2 like singular, and the like.
> > Here you
> > can exploit the fact that all mentioned plural form formulas eventually
> > become periodic,
> > with a period that is a divisor of 100 (or 1000 or 1000000). So, when you
> > reduce a large
> > value to another one in the range [1000000, 1999999] that ends in the same
> > 6 decimal
> > digits, you can assume that it will lead to the same plural form selection.
> > This code
> > does this:
> >
> > #include <inttypes.h>
> > uintmax_t nbytes = ...;
> > printf (ngettext ("The file has %"PRIuMAX" byte.",
> > "The file has %"PRIuMAX" bytes.",
> > (nbytes > ULONG_MAX
> > ? (nbytes % 1000000) + 1000000
> > : nbytes)),
> > nbytes);"
> >
> > I can surely add a comment about that.
> >
> > Note the patch depends on the
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-11/msg02521.html
> > patch.
>
> Though, looking at our *_n diagnostic routines, the n argument is actually
> int there, not unsigned long for some reason. So, either we should fix
> that (seems ngettext has unsigned long), or the above would need to be
> (unsigned HOST_WIDE_INT) (int) eltscnt != eltscnt || (int) eltscnt < 0
Of course better eltscnt > INT_MAX
Jakub
