autoconf-patches
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: AC_TYPE_LONG_LONG_INT and AC_TYPE_UNSIGNED_LONG_LONG_INT


From: Paul Eggert
Subject: Re: AC_TYPE_LONG_LONG_INT and AC_TYPE_UNSIGNED_LONG_LONG_INT
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 01:00:38 -0700
User-agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux)

Bruno Haible <address@hidden> writes:

> #if ! (-2147483648LL < 0)
> ...
> #if ! (-9223372036854775807LL < 0)

If a compiler can't handle that sort of line, then its bugs are more
serious, since it's relatively common to do preprocessor checks
like "#if LLONG_MIN < LONG_MIN".

How about this idea instead?  We sort-of-combine the tests for
unsigned long long and for signed long long, so that they always
return consistent answers.  One can AC_REQUIRE the other, for example,
and use its answer.  The combined test will be the union of the
current tests.




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]