On Wednesday, September 7, 2022, Steffen Nurpmeso
wrote:
> Kang-Che Sung wrote in
> :
> |On Wednesday, September 7, 2022, Steffen Nurpmeso
> |wrote:
> ...
> |>|> + if(su_64( i > U32_MAX || ) i >= UZ_MAX / 2 ||
> ...
> |>|I have to admit that the amount of macro maze makes it really
Kang-Che Sung wrote in
:
|On Wednesday, September 7, 2022, Steffen Nurpmeso
|wrote:
...
|>|> + if(su_64( i > U32_MAX || ) i >= UZ_MAX / 2 ||
...
|>|I have to admit that the amount of macro maze makes it really hard to
|>|read ;)
|>
|> Well it is easier than having lots of #ifdef
Steffen Nurpmeso wrote in
<20220906193906.l5sy8%stef...@sdaoden.eu>:
...
||Missing license statement here?
...
||Ah, here is the license. Please move it to line 2 ?
...
Btw i have no problem with relicensing this to Public Domain, or
even simply removing the (ISC) license, shall it be
On Wednesday, September 7, 2022, Steffen Nurpmeso
wrote:
> |> + /* Overflow check: since arithmetic expressions are rarely \
> |> long enough
> |> + * to come near this limit, xxx laxe & fuzzy, not exact; max \
> |> U32_MAX! */
> |> + if(su_64( i > U32_MAX || ) i >= UZ_MAX /
Hello.
Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote in
<20220906183821.1f82672d@nbbrfq>:
|On Wed, 31 Aug 2022 01:43:26 +0200
|Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
|
|> The former implementation was not correct regarding whiteouts in
|> ?: conditional branches. The new one also parses a bit better, in
|> effect on
Hi Steffen,
On Wed, 31 Aug 2022 01:43:26 +0200
Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
> The former implementation was not correct regarding whiteouts in
> ?: conditional branches. The new one also parses a bit better, in
> effect on equal level than bash with its recursive descendent parser.
Please provide
