Ah yes, you are right. I understand now.
I don't know how this can be represented without an overflow warning
in C and still make sense.
Anyhow, I've changed it now to avoid the compiler warning. If we come
up with something more meaningful we can change it again.
Bill.
On 29 September 2012 00:
-Original Message-
From: Bill Hart
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 11:13 PM
To: mpir-devel@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [mpir-devel] Re: MPIR 2.6 release progress
On 28 September 2012 22:15, Brian Gladman wrote:
-Original Message- From: Bill Hart
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2
On 28 September 2012 22:15, Brian Gladman wrote:
> -Original Message- From: Bill Hart
> Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 9:39 PM
> To: mpir-devel@googlegroups.com
>
> Subject: Re: [mpir-devel] Re: MPIR 2.6 release progress
>
> Does anyone have any idea about this t-set_sx code.
>
> It sets
-Original Message-
From: Bill Hart
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 9:39 PM
To: mpir-devel@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [mpir-devel] Re: MPIR 2.6 release progress
Does anyone have any idea about this t-set_sx code.
It sets up an array of structs (not all fully populated):
{ 0L, 0
Does anyone have any idea about this t-set_sx code.
It sets up an array of structs (not all fully populated):
{ 0L, 0 },
{ 1L, 1, { 1 } },
{ -1L, -1, { 1 } },
#if GMP_NUMB_BITS >= BITS_PER_UINTMAX
{ INTMAX_MAX, 1, { INTMAX_MAX, 0 } },
{ -INTMAX_MAX, -1, { INTMAX_MAX,
-Original Message-
From: Bill Hart
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 5:42 PM
To: mpir-devel@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [mpir-devel] Possible Issue with the Windows command lIne
build?
[snip]
Its such a good idea that I have already done it!
In the big gap in MPIR development progr
On 28 September 2012 17:40, Brian Gladman wrote:
> -Original Message- From: Brian Gladman
> Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 5:18 PM
>
> To: mpir-devel@googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: [mpir-devel] Possible Issue with the Windows command lIne
> build?
>
> -Original Message- From: Bi
-Original Message-
From: Brian Gladman
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 5:18 PM
To: mpir-devel@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [mpir-devel] Possible Issue with the Windows command lIne
build?
-Original Message-
From: Bill Hart
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 5:07 PM
To: mpir-d
Indeed on MinGW32 INTMAX_MIN is 64 bits and GMP_NUMB_BITS is 32 bits.
However, INTMAX_MIN is the minimum negative long long, of which you
cannot take the unary minus, since it has no positive counterpart.
Could someone who understands the code please advise me on what I
should do to fix it.
It's
The problem is the expression:
-INTMAX_MIN
The expression
INTMAX_MIN
is fine.
Bill.
On 28 September 2012 17:10, Bill Hart wrote:
> I am trying to fix a compiler warning on MinGW32, but I don't
> understand the code, so I don't know the correct fix.
>
> It is complaining that there is an over
-Original Message-
From: Bill Hart
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 5:07 PM
To: mpir-devel@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [mpir-devel] Possible Issue with the Windows command lIne
build?
On 28 September 2012 16:36, Brian Gladman wrote:
-Original Message- From: Bill Hart
Sent:
I am trying to fix a compiler warning on MinGW32, but I don't
understand the code, so I don't know the correct fix.
It is complaining that there is an overflow in the expressions:
-INTMAX_MIN & GMP_NUMB_MASK, -INTMAX_MIN >> GMP_NUMB_BITS
on line 60 of the test program t-set_sx.c.
I don't know w
On 28 September 2012 16:36, Brian Gladman wrote:
> -Original Message- From: Bill Hart
> Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 4:16 PM
> To: mpir-devel@googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: [mpir-devel] Possible Issue with the Windows command lIne
> build?
>
>
> I don't know very much about the comman
-Original Message-
From: Bill Hart
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 4:18 PM
To: mpir-devel@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [mpir-devel] Possible Issue with the Windows command lIne
build?
Oh wait, I think option 3 may be a problem. If we distribute the .cfg
files, we also need to distrib
-Original Message-
From: Bill Hart
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 4:16 PM
To: mpir-devel@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [mpir-devel] Possible Issue with the Windows command lIne
build?
I don't know very much about the command line build. But I am not
really in favour of option 1.
I d
Oh wait, I think option 3 may be a problem. If we distribute the .cfg
files, we also need to distribute a GPL means of generating them. So I
think option 2 is the only possibility, if I am not mistaken.
On 28 September 2012 16:16, Bill Hart wrote:
> I don't know very much about the command line b
I don't know very much about the command line build. But I am not
really in favour of option 1.
I don't see why option 3 is a problem. However, it depends. Is the cfg
file different per architecture? Would it automatically find the right
one if they were all there in their respective directories?
fft/tune/tune-fft.c is now included in the distribution tarball.
I also discovered that make speed is working after all. I simply
hadn't built the library.
I also checked the fft cutoffs by hand and it is producing reasonable
cutoffs. It's surprising to me that the toom8h code is competitive
(wit
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 2:09 AM, Cactus wrote:
> As far as I can tell, the Windows command line build relies on a file
> (cfg.h) in each of the mpn assembler directories. This file holds a list of
> the assembler files in the directory
>
> But there is a potential problem here because these cfg.h
As far as I can tell, the Windows command line build relies on a file
(cfg.h) in each of the mpn assembler directories. This file holds a list of
the assembler files in the directory
But there is a potential problem here because these cfg.h files are built
only when the Visual Studio build for
20 matches
Mail list logo
