On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 3:31 PM Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On 29/04/21 16:06 -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> >On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 1:37 PM Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >>
> >> On 06/01/21 19:41 -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
> >> >Thanks for clarifying the issue.
> >> >
> >> >As you implicitly point o
On 29/04/21 16:06 -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 1:37 PM Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 06/01/21 19:41 -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
>Thanks for clarifying the issue.
>
>As you implicitly point out, GCC knows the type of INT64 and defines
>the macro __INT64_TYPE__ . The revised
On 29/04/21 16:06 -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 1:37 PM Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 06/01/21 19:41 -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
>Thanks for clarifying the issue.
>
>As you implicitly point out, GCC knows the type of INT64 and defines
>the macro __INT64_TYPE__ . The revised
On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 1:37 PM Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On 06/01/21 19:41 -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
> >Thanks for clarifying the issue.
> >
> >As you implicitly point out, GCC knows the type of INT64 and defines
> >the macro __INT64_TYPE__ . The revised code can use that directly,
> >such as
On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 1:52 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 08, 2021 at 06:37:03PM +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > This uses __INT64_TYPE__ if that's defined, and long long otherwise. I
> > think that should be equivalent in all practical cases (I can imagine
> > some strange target wher
On Fri, Jan 08, 2021 at 06:37:03PM +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> This uses __INT64_TYPE__ if that's defined, and long long otherwise. I
> think that should be equivalent in all practical cases (I can imagine
> some strange target where __INT64_TYPE__ is defined by the compiler,
> but int64_t isn'
On 06/01/21 19:41 -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
Thanks for clarifying the issue.
As you implicitly point out, GCC knows the type of INT64 and defines
the macro __INT64_TYPE__ . The revised code can use that directly,
such as:
#if defined(_GLIBCXX_HAVE_INT64_T_LONG) \
|| defined(_GLIBCXX_HAVE
Thanks for clarifying the issue.
As you implicitly point out, GCC knows the type of INT64 and defines
the macro __INT64_TYPE__ . The revised code can use that directly,
such as:
#if defined(_GLIBCXX_HAVE_INT64_T_LONG) \
|| defined(_GLIBCXX_HAVE_INT64_T_LONG_LONG)
typedef __INT64_TYPE__
On Thu, Jan 07, 2021 at 12:39:39AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> We are talking past each other.
>
> Consider an OS that has in stdint.h
> typedef long long int64_t;
And, from grepping INT64_TYPE in config/* config/*/*
it isn't just theoretic, Darwin and OpenBSD behave that way.
Jakub
On Wed, Jan 06, 2021 at 06:01:23PM -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
> You continue to not respond to the actual patch and to raise issues
> that don't exist in the actual patch.
We are talking past each other.
Consider an OS that has in stdint.h
typedef long long int64_t;
supports 32-bit and 64-bit m
On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 4:42 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 06, 2021 at 04:20:22PM -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
> > Your response doesn't correspond to the patch nor to what I described.
> >
> > Nowhere did I say that int64_t must correspond to "long". The patch
> > specifically chooses "
On Wed, Jan 06, 2021 at 04:20:22PM -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
> Your response doesn't correspond to the patch nor to what I described.
>
> Nowhere did I say that int64_t must correspond to "long". The patch
> specifically chooses "long" or "long long" based on the
> __SIZEOF_LONG__ *and* __SIZE
On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 2:37 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 06, 2021 at 01:38:25PM -0500, David Edelsohn via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> > Is this an acceptable solution to determine the value at compile-time?
>
> This looks wrong to me. The fact that long is 64-bit doesn't imply that
> int64
On Wed, Jan 06, 2021 at 01:38:25PM -0500, David Edelsohn via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Is this an acceptable solution to determine the value at compile-time?
This looks wrong to me. The fact that long is 64-bit doesn't imply that
int64_t as defined by stdint.h must be long, it could be long long too.
On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 1:55 PM Marc Glisse wrote:
>
> On Wed, 6 Jan 2021, David Edelsohn via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
> > Currently the type of streamoff is determined at libstdc++ configure
> > time, chosen by the definitions of _GLIBCXX_HAVE_INT64_T_LONG and
> > _GLIBCXX_HAVE_INT64_T_LONG_LONG. For
On Wed, 6 Jan 2021, David Edelsohn via Gcc-patches wrote:
Currently the type of streamoff is determined at libstdc++ configure
time, chosen by the definitions of _GLIBCXX_HAVE_INT64_T_LONG and
_GLIBCXX_HAVE_INT64_T_LONG_LONG. For a multilib configuration, the
difference is encoded in the differ
Use __SIZEOF_LONG__ and __SIZEOF_LONG_LONG__ to determine the type of
streamoff at compile time instead of _GLIBCXX_HAVE_INT64_T_LONG and
_GLIBCXX_HAVE_INT64_T_LONG_LONG.
Currently the type of streamoff is determined at libstdc++ configure
time, chosen by the definitions of _GLIBCXX_HAVE_INT64_T_L
17 matches
Mail list logo
