On 2020-06-09 10:21:31 +0200, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Jun 2020, Niels Möller wrote:
>
> > Marc Glisse writes:
> >
> > > On Sat, 6 Jun 2020, Mihai Preda wrote:
> > >
> > > > I would rather suggest to support intmax_t and uintmax_t.
> > >
> > > That's one possibility for C (and C++,
On Tue, 9 Jun 2020, Niels Möller wrote:
Marc Glisse writes:
On Sat, 6 Jun 2020, Mihai Preda wrote:
I would rather suggest to support intmax_t and uintmax_t.
That's one possibility for C (and C++, although it is a bit more
painful there), but not one that everyone agrees with. I think the
> On 6 Jun 2020, at 06:28, Mihai Preda wrote:
>
> At this point the C++ compiler on windows (where long is 32-bit)
> reports errors, see at the end. The problem is that the set of
> constructors does not include one taking a 64-bit integer:
>
> #define __GMPXX_DEFINE_ARITHMETIC_CONSTRUCTORS
Marc Glisse writes:
> On Sat, 6 Jun 2020, Mihai Preda wrote:
>
>> I would rather suggest to support intmax_t and uintmax_t.
>
> That's one possibility for C (and C++, although it is a bit more
> painful there), but not one that everyone agrees with. I think the
> majority in standard committees
On Mon, 8 Jun 2020, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
Couldn't the C interface *optionally* support more than C89?
I think the policy has been to have one uniform interface, and requiring
C99 for GMP is likely to happen. I am generally in favor of optional
support for __int128, which wouldn't be
On 2020-06-08 22:32:25 +0200, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Jun 2020, Mihai Preda wrote:
>
> > At this point the C++ compiler on windows (where long is 32-bit)
> > reports errors, see at the end. The problem is that the set of
> > constructors does not include one taking a 64-bit integer:
>
>
On Sat, 6 Jun 2020, Mihai Preda wrote:
At this point the C++ compiler on windows (where long is 32-bit)
reports errors, see at the end. The problem is that the set of
constructors does not include one taking a 64-bit integer:
The issue is that:
1) the C++ interface follows the C interface
2)
On 2020-06-06 14:28:21 +1000, Mihai Preda wrote:
> I'm using libgmp-dev 6.1.2 on Ubuntu myself, but the bug report
> concerns an unspecified version of GMP on Windows. I have reasons to
> suspect the bug is valid for the most recent GMP. Clear cause analysis
> and proposed solution is included.
>
I'm using libgmp-dev 6.1.2 on Ubuntu myself, but the bug report
concerns an unspecified version of GMP on Windows. I have reasons to
suspect the bug is valid for the most recent GMP. Clear cause analysis
and proposed solution is included.
I'm not a Windows user myself. I develop an open-source
