|| ||Al Viro <viro-AT-ZenIV.linux.org.uk> |
|| ||David Miller <davem-AT-davemloft.net> |
|| ||Re: [GIT] Sparc |
|| ||Wed, 18 Aug 2010 03:50:23 +0100|
|| ||torvalds-AT-linux-foundation.org, akpm-AT-linux-foundation.org,
|| ||Article, Thread
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 07:12:45PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Linus Torvalds <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 18:31:50 -0700
> > Confused yet?
> > The basic rule becomes: never _ever_ overflow 'int' in a constant,
> > without specifying the exact type you want. That way you avoid all the
> > subtle cases.
> That's easier to understand.
Actually, it's not that complicated:
1) base and suffices choose the possible types.
2) order of types is always the same: int -> unsigned -> long -> unsigned
long -> long long -> unsigned long long
3) we always choose the first type the value would fit into
4) L in suffix == "at least long"
5) LL in suffix == "at least long long"
6) U in suffix == "unsigned"
7) without U in suffix, base 10 == "signed"
That's it. C90 differs from C99 only in one thing - long long (and LL) isn't
there. The subtle mess Linus has mentioned is C90 gccism: gcc has allowed
unsigned long for decimal constants, as the last resort. I.e. if you had
a plain decimal constant that wouldn't fit into long but would fit into
unsigned long, gcc generated a warning and treated it as unsigned long.
C90 would reject the damn thing. _Bad_ extension, since in C99 the same
constant would be a legitimate signed long long.
But yes, "use the suffix when unsure" is a damn good idea, _especially_ since
the sizeof(long) actually varies between the targets we care about.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in
the body of a message to email@example.com
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
to post comments)