0 < -0x8000 == 1 with 5c.
the problem is caused by this:
if(a == ACMP && f1->op == OCONST && p->from.offset < 0) {
p->as = ACMN;
p->from.offset = -p->from.offset;
}
because 0x8000 == -0x8000
adding the f
Good catch.
2's complement integers are generally useful but it's easy to
forget that they don't quite obey normal algebraic rules.
The assumption that
(a < 0) => (-a > 0)
is the cause of many easily-missed bugs.
On Wed Jan 2 04:07:28 EST 2013, cinap_len...@gmx.de wrote:
> 0 < -0x8000 == 1 with 5c.
i get the same results for all compilers:
0 < -0x8000..yes
1 == -0x8000..no
0 < -0x8000 == 1..yes
for [568]c. the last one is correct since the order of ope
those are being done at compile time.
On 2 January 2013 15:07, erik quanstrom wrote:
> i get the same results for all compilers:
and 0x8000 is thereby unsigned int, which changes the nature of
the comparison.
On 2 January 2013 15:53, Charles Forsyth wrote:
> those are being done at compile time.
>
> On 2 January 2013 15:07, erik quanstrom wrote:
>> i get the same results for all compilers:
Is this related to the bug I found in python on arm?
On Jan 2, 2013, at 4:05, cinap_len...@gmx.de wrote:
> 0 < -0x8000 == 1 with 5c.
>
> the problem is caused by this:
>
>if(a == ACMP && f1->op == OCONST && p->from.offset < 0) {
>p->as = ACMN;
>p->from.offset
On Wed Jan 2 13:32:30 EST 2013, mve...@gmail.com wrote:
> Is this related to the bug I found in python on arm?
>
it would be much more helpful if "the bug" and "python code"
were replaced with specific references.
- erik
Hello I have read many useful information on the net but I have not
found specific details to create the image of plan 9 for each
platform, I saw the patch applied by 9legacy but the notes are not
very detailed, who can give me the documentation for create iso differ
according to the architecture o
On Wed Jan 2 13:42:10 EST 2013, cardifrance...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hello I have read many useful information on the net but I have not
> found specific details to create the image of plan 9 for each
> platform, I saw the patch applied by 9legacy but the notes are not
> very detailed, who can give m
> i'm wondering if the install media should contain nothing but the
> source, a bootstrap loader, a kernel and just enough binaries to
> be able to compile all the source for whatever arches you're interested
> in.
I recently put together just such a thing for arm. This set of binaries
is enough
On Wed, Jan 02, 2013 at 01:50:23PM -0500, erik quanstrom wrote:
> i currently have an iso image with amd64, arm, and 386 binaries. it's
> not tested because i am waiting on a sata cd drive. [...]
I have one that I'm not using, would you like me to mail it to you?
pgp0dsX3RNThE.pgp
Description:
On Wed Jan 2 14:24:50 EST 2013, sbald...@ednos.net wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 02, 2013 at 01:50:23PM -0500, erik quanstrom wrote:
> > i currently have an iso image with amd64, arm, and 386 binaries. it's
> > not tested because i am waiting on a sata cd drive. [...]
>
> I have one that I'm not using,
I think the most practical thing is to create an iso based on the
specific architecture you have, you have to give me the link, the
messages I have written does not give me complete information but they
are only concepts, I need documntazione I want to build a iso, do not
want to create a combo iso
yes.
--
cinap
What I think people are trying to say is that this doesn't really make
a lot of sense. The AMD64 system doesn't have any installer work done
for it at all--I think it's not far off, but to the best of my
knowledge nobody has built a CDROM that boots the 64-bit kernel and
gives you the installer fro
the offending line that triggered it is in Python/getargs.c
in the convertsimple() function (the ival < INT_MIN comparsion):
case 'i': {/* signed int */
int *p = va_arg(*p_va, int *);
long ival;
if (float_argument_error(arg))
> What I think people are trying to say is that this doesn't really make
> a lot of sense. The AMD64 system doesn't have any installer work done
> for it at all--I think it's not far off, but to the best of my
> knowledge nobody has built a CDROM that boots the 64-bit kernel and
> gives you the ins
> knowledge nobody has built a CDROM that boots the 64-bit kernel and
> gives you the installer from there (Erik, have you done this yet?).
no, i don't see the point. it's a multi platform thing and there is nothing
lost in installing or installing from the 32-bit binaries, even if you run
a 64-b
> it's a multi platform thing
by this i mean, a big plus for plan 9 is the ability to seemlessly
deal with many architectures.
- erik
I think some of the acorn machines had CDROM drives. They can't boot from them
though.
On Jan 2, 2013, at 15:11, John Floren wrote:
> What I think people are trying to say is that this doesn't really make
> a lot of sense. The AMD64 system doesn't have any installer work done
> for it at all--
> I think some of the acorn machines had CDROM drives. They can't boot from
> them though.
right and so it's like I said, I read in the documentation that you
have loaded the kernel-specific architecture along, I want to load the
kernel and then create an iso with that kernel, the same thing has
i have a test image of a new and hopefully improved 9atom @
http://www.quanstro.net/other/9atom2.iso.bz2.
it's not perfect, it's not polished, but it should contain the
basics, be go compatable, contain a copy of nix, be self-compiling,
and a few other things that i'll announce once i have
22 matches
Mail list logo
