Oh no! Our mpirxx.h file also checks HAVE_STDINT_H This is defined in config.h too!!
Bill. On 12 October 2012 20:24, Bill Hart <goodwillh...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Yeah, I've just done it now. > > Bill. > > On 12 October 2012 20:23, Brian Gladman <b...@gladman.plus.com> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- From: Bill Hart >> Sent: Friday, October 12, 2012 8:18 PM >> To: mpir-devel@googlegroups.com >> >> Subject: Re: [mpir-devel] MPIR 2.6.0 alpha1 released >> >> I think we should test if LLONG_MAX is defined. This actually doesn't >> tell us if long long exists, but tells us if long long exists AND the >> system long long's are fully c99 compliant. >> >> Then if LLONG_MAX is not defined but MAXINT_MAX is defined and not >> equal to LONG_MAX, then we should define maxint_t function. >> >> I'll try this and see if it works. I think this is what is causing the >> bug on the ia64 machine with gcc 4.1.2. >> >> =================== >> >> So all the HAVE_LONG_LONG in mpirxx.h need to be changed to test for >> LLONG_MAX? >> >> Brian >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "mpir-devel" group. >> To post to this group, send email to mpir-devel@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> mpir-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/mpir-devel?hl=en. >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mpir-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to mpir-devel@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mpir-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mpir-devel?hl=en.
