This is the mail archive of the
gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: gcc 3.3: long long bug?
- From: John Love-Jensen <eljay at adobe dot com>
- To: Andreas Schwab <schwab at suse dot de>, Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at libertysurf dot fr>
- Cc: Lev Assinovsky <LAssinovsky at algorithm dot aelita dot com>, <gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org>, <gcc-help at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 08:00:57 -0500
- Subject: Re: gcc 3.3: long long bug?
Hi Andreas,
> |> Append "LL" to the constant.
>
> That should not be needed.
The "LL" should be needed, unless a "long long" is the same size as a
"long".
The "long long" data type is an extension to the C (ISO 9989) and C++ (ISO
14882) specs. As such, automatically sizing a numeric literal to "long
long" (like how a numeric literal that's too big for an "int" becomes an
"unsigned int", and then a "long" and then an "unsigned long") could cause
problems.
Unfortunately, requiring the "LL" suffix causes other headaches.
I wonder when we'll have "long long long" (128-bit) and "long long long
long" (256-bit) numbers. With accompanying "LLL" and "LLLL" suffixes.
*sigh*
--Eljay