Re: Should existing use of 'LL' and 'ULL' when specifying a constant be fixed ?

[Pascal Quantin <pascal.quantin () gmail com>]

2013/12/17 Bill Meier <wmeier () newsguy com>

> README.developer says:
>
>  When specifying an integral constant that doesn't fit in 32 bits, don't
>  use "LL" at the end of the constant - not all compilers use "LL" for
>  that.  Instead, put the constant in a call to the "G_GINT64_CONSTANT()"
>  macro, e.g.
>
>     G_GINT64_CONSTANT(11644473600U)
>
>  rather than
>
>     11644473600ULL
>
>
> I note that in current SVN there are a number of cases where ULL (or LL)
> are used.
>
> e.g.: packet-9p.c:#define _9P_GETATTR_MODE         0x00000001ULL
>
> Should these be fixed ? (or is the README outdated ?)
>
> If they should be fixed:
>
>    It appears that G_GUINT64_CONSTANT can be used (since we require
>    GLib 2.16 and based upon an EMail from a while back it seems that
>    GLib 2.10 & newer define G_GUINT64_CONSTANT).
>
>    So: I would update README.developer and make the
>    source changes.
>
> If the README is outdated, I would remove the statement from the README.

Hi Bill,

as I would vote for the use of G_G(U)INT 64_CONSTANT macros everywhere to
be consistent with the existing code.

BR,
Pascal.

___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe