Re: [Libreoffice] Updated [Patch] new BITxxx functions for ODF 1.2

Hi Regina, On Wednesday, 2011-09-07 16:58:04 +0200, Regina Henschel wrote: > >so what evaluates _MSC_VER to in MSVCE? > > How can I get that information? > > In Env.Host.sh I get the lines: > SIZEOF_LONGLONG="8" I think if long long is supported to be 8 bytes we can safely assume that the type

Re: [Libreoffice] Updated [Patch] new BITxxx functions for ODF 1.2

Hi Olivier, On Wednesday, 2011-09-07 15:59:29 -0300, Olivier Hallot wrote: > Well... no specific procedure, except to edit the wiki as I did > (just to not > forget it): > > http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/3.5#Calc Thanks, just needed a pointer.. Eike -- PGP/OpenPGP/GnuPG

Re: [Libreoffice] Updated [Patch] new BITxxx functions for ODF 1.2

> Visual Studio has supported 64-bit int types (long long) since at least > Visual Studio 2005. Isn't "__int64" (and "unsigned __int64") the more traditional name for the 64-bit integer types in MSVC? "long long" is newer in MSVC; in other compilers it is of course the "normal" one. --tml ___

Re: [Libreoffice] Updated [Patch] new BITxxx functions for ODF 1.2

Hi Eike Well... no specific procedure, except to edit the wiki as I did (just to not forget it): http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/3.5#Calc Olivier Em 07-09-2011 09:51, Eike Rathke escreveu: Hi Olivier, On Sunday, 2011-09-04 16:42:38 -0300, Olivier Hallot wrote: If pushed,

Re: [Libreoffice] Updated [Patch] new BITxxx functions for ODF 1.2

Hi Dennis, Dennis E. Hamilton schrieb: Um, of course, having 64 bit integers and having the bit-wise functions work on them at full width is a bit different. Easy to test though. The Visual C++ Express Editions have had the same 64-bit (long long) support as the full-up Visual Studio Professio

Re: [Libreoffice] Updated [Patch] new BITxxx functions for ODF 1.2

Henschel; Korrawit Pruegsanusak; l...@pechlaner.at; Thorsten Behrens; libreoffice@lists.freedesktop.org Subject: Re: [Libreoffice] Updated [Patch] new BITxxx functions for ODF 1.2 Visual Studio has supported 64-bit int types (long long) since at least Visual Studio 2005. See here: http

Re: [Libreoffice] Updated [Patch] new BITxxx functions for ODF 1.2

p.org Subject: Re: [Libreoffice] Updated [Patch] new BITxxx functions for ODF 1.2 Hi Eike, Eike Rathke schrieb: > Hi Regina, > > On Wednesday, 2011-09-07 15:04:47 +0200, Regina Henschel wrote: > >> I see a lot of sal_uInt64 in the code. Is that supported for >> Windows? As fa

Re: [Libreoffice] Updated [Patch] new BITxxx functions for ODF 1.2

Hi Eike, Eike Rathke schrieb: Hi Regina, On Wednesday, 2011-09-07 15:04:47 +0200, Regina Henschel wrote: I see a lot of sal_uInt64 in the code. Is that supported for Windows? As far as I know at least the MSVC Express has only 4Byte long. Umm.. now that you mention.. sal/inc/sal/types.h has

Re: [Libreoffice] Updated [Patch] new BITxxx functions for ODF 1.2

Visual Studio has supported 64-bit int types (long long) since at least Visual Studio 2005. See here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/s3f49ktz(v=vs.80).aspx _MSC_VER evaluates to the version of the Visual Studio compiler

Re: [Libreoffice] Updated [Patch] new BITxxx functions for ODF 1.2

On 09/07/2011 04:37 PM, Eike Rathke wrote: Hi Regina, On Wednesday, 2011-09-07 15:04:47 +0200, Regina Henschel wrote: I see a lot of sal_uInt64 in the code. Is that supported for Windows? As far as I know at least the MSVC Express has only 4Byte long. Umm.. now that you mention.. sal/inc/sal

Re: [Libreoffice] Updated [Patch] new BITxxx functions for ODF 1.2

Hi Regina, On Wednesday, 2011-09-07 15:04:47 +0200, Regina Henschel wrote: > I see a lot of sal_uInt64 in the code. Is that supported for > Windows? As far as I know at least the MSVC Express has only 4Byte > long. Umm.. now that you mention.. sal/inc/sal/types.h has #if (_MSC_VER >= 1000)

Re: [Libreoffice] Updated [Patch] new BITxxx functions for ODF 1.2

Hi Eike, I see a lot of sal_uInt64 in the code. Is that supported for Windows? As far as I know at least the MSVC Express has only 4Byte long. Kind regards Regina Eike Rathke schrieb: Hi Korrawit, On Tuesday, 2011-09-06 21:52:46 +0700, Korrawit Pruegsanusak wrote: And please s/interger/in

Re: [Libreoffice] Updated [Patch] new BITxxx functions for ODF 1.2

Hi Olivier, On Sunday, 2011-09-04 16:42:38 -0300, Olivier Hallot wrote: > If pushed, these new functions should be advertised in the Release notes. What's the procedure for that? Eike -- PGP/OpenPGP/GnuPG encrypted mail preferred in all private communication. Key ID: 0x293C05FD - 997A 4C6

Re: [Libreoffice] Updated [Patch] new BITxxx functions for ODF 1.2

Hi Korrawit, On Tuesday, 2011-09-06 21:52:46 +0700, Korrawit Pruegsanusak wrote: > And please s/interger/integer ;) Did that in the commit. > Also, it seems that you haven't check the range of ishift yet, whether > it is between -48 and 48 (from your description), or it isn't > necessary? I don

Re: [Libreoffice] Updated [Patch] new BITxxx functions for ODF 1.2

Hello all, On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 20:08, Niko Rönkkö wrote: > Hi > >> Wonderful, great stuff - I have to apologize, the many whitespace >> changes in the calc part of the patch are because of my substandard >> mentoring - cleaned-up version of the first patch attached. > > I was in the belief tha

Re: [Libreoffice] Updated [Patch] new BITxxx functions for ODF 1.2

Hi Wonderful, great stuff - I have to apologize, the many whitespace changes in the calc part of the patch are because of my substandard mentoring - cleaned-up version of the first patch attached. I was in the belief that we shall use spaces instead of tabs. Corrected patches attached. -- RN

Re: [Libreoffice] Updated [Patch] new BITxxx functions for ODF 1.2

Hi If pushed, these new functions should be advertised in the Release notes. Olivier Em 04-09-2011 09:45, Thorsten Behrens escreveu: l...@pechlaner.at wrote: I've made the new Functions BITAND, BITOR, BITXOR BITRSHIFT and BITLSHIFT,, how declared in the ODF 1.2 specification. Can anyone have

Re: [Libreoffice] Updated [Patch] new BITxxx functions for ODF 1.2

l...@pechlaner.at wrote: > I've made the new Functions BITAND, BITOR, BITXOR BITRSHIFT > and BITLSHIFT,, how declared in the ODF 1.2 specification. Can anyone > have a look on this Patches. > Wonderful, great stuff - I have to apologize, the many whitespace changes in the calc part of the patch a