Don't know if there could be other peep.in rules that take precedence
or vary randomly. I know that one of the other bugs that I fixed
(tNStr) didn't show up every compile.

The fix I did for F_NEG_NUMBER begs the question whether 0x80000000 is
a valid argument for negation. I would assume not and that would point
to an missing overflow check in peep.in similar to some of the other
NUMBER rules. That doesn't explain your working case but I guess you
need to trace the opcodes to be sure whether it's the same situation I
ran into.
  • Re:... Arne Goedeke
    • ... Arne Goedeke
      • ... Jonas Walld�n @ Pike developers forum
      • ... Martin Nilsson (Opera Mini - AFK!) @ Pike (-) developers forum
      • ... Jonas Walld�n @ Pike developers forum
      • ... Martin Nilsson (Opera Mini - AFK!) @ Pike (-) developers forum
      • ... Mirar @ Pike developers forum
      • ... Jonas Walld�n @ Pike developers forum
      • ... Arne Goedeke
      • ... Henrik Grubbstr�m (Lysator) @ Pike (-) developers forum
      • ... Jonas Walld�n @ Pike developers forum
      • ... Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) @ Pike (-) developers forum
      • ... Arne Goedeke
      • ... Henrik Grubbstr�m (Lysator) @ Pike (-) developers forum
      • ... Arne Goedeke

Reply via email to