gcc 3.3: long long bug?

[Lev Assinovsky]

I think gcc 3.2 (which didn't give me any errors)
behaves more properly, automatically converting 
rvalue to lvalue. Such behavior also solves
"long long long ..." problems.

----
Lev Assinovsky
Aelita Software Corporation
O&S Core Division, Programmer
ICQ# 165072909


> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Love-Jensen [mailto:eljay@adobe.com]
> Sent: Monday, April 07, 2003 5:01 PM
> To: Andreas Schwab; Eric Botcazou
> Cc: Lev Assinovsky; gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org; gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org
> 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
> 
>