On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 02:13:53AM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> On Wednesday 05 September 2007 9:55:43 pm Dave Dodge wrote:
> > Cray had some architectures with 64-bit bytes, but simulated 8-bit
> > bytes in userspace by using otherwise-unused high bits in a pointer to
[...]
> Again, does Linux run
On Wednesday 05 September 2007 9:55:43 pm Dave Dodge wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 06:17:38PM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> > On Wednesday 05 September 2007 5:32:06 pm Dave Dodge wrote:
> > > For Linux certainly. My understanding is that there are current
> > > architectures in the embedded marke
On Wednesday 05 September 2007 6:29:04 pm Rob Landley wrote:
> On Wednesday 05 September 2007 6:17:38 pm Rob Landley wrote:
> > Hang on, so when char *a is constant, (int)a is _not_ constant?
> >
> > How does that work?
>
> Looking back at it, I think what the standard means is since the actual
> a
On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 06:17:38PM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> On Wednesday 05 September 2007 5:32:06 pm Dave Dodge wrote:
> > For Linux certainly. My understanding is that there are current
> > architectures in the embedded market that use a 32-bit char, though.
>
> I haven't heard of them, and
Rob Landley wrote:
On Wednesday 05 September 2007 6:17:38 pm Rob Landley wrote:
Hang on, so when char *a is constant, (int)a is _not_ constant?
How does that work?
Looking back at it, I think what the standard means is since the actual
address of the char * is supplied by the linker, than de
On Wednesday 05 September 2007 6:17:38 pm Rob Landley wrote:
> Hang on, so when char *a is constant, (int)a is _not_ constant?
>
> How does that work?
Looking back at it, I think what the standard means is since the actual
address of the char * is supplied by the linker, than despite it being a
On Wednesday 05 September 2007 5:32:06 pm Dave Dodge wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 12:46:00PM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> > On Wednesday 05 September 2007 3:25:59 am Dave Dodge wrote:
> > > Pretty much the only way it seems to allow using a
> > > pointer/address to an object _anywhere_ in a cons
On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 12:46:00PM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> On Wednesday 05 September 2007 3:25:59 am Dave Dodge wrote:
> > Pretty much the only way it seems to allow using a
> > pointer/address to an object _anywhere_ in a constant expression is in
> > sizeof context, or when the final express
On Wednesday 05 September 2007 5:27:46 am Gregg Reynolds wrote:
> On 9/5/07, Rob Landley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wednesday 05 September 2007 1:02:03 am Dave Dodge wrote:
> > > > I fixed the "ptr || ptr" bit not working (check hg), and I just made
> > > > it stop warning me about "comparis
On Wednesday 05 September 2007 3:25:59 am Dave Dodge wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 02:33:58AM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> > On Wednesday 05 September 2007 1:02:03 am Dave Dodge wrote:
> > > > I fixed the "ptr || ptr" bit not working (check hg), and I just made
> > > > it stop warning me about "c
On 9/5/07, Rob Landley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 05 September 2007 1:02:03 am Dave Dodge wrote:
> > > I fixed the "ptr || ptr" bit not working (check hg), and I just made it
> > > stop warning me about "comparison between pointer and int" for && and ||,
> > > but now it's saying "in
On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 02:33:58AM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> On Wednesday 05 September 2007 1:02:03 am Dave Dodge wrote:
> > > I fixed the "ptr || ptr" bit not working (check hg), and I just made it
> > > stop warning me about "comparison between pointer and int" for && and ||,
> > > but now it's
On Wednesday 05 September 2007 1:02:03 am Dave Dodge wrote:
> > I fixed the "ptr || ptr" bit not working (check hg), and I just made it
> > stop warning me about "comparison between pointer and int" for && and ||,
> > but now it's saying "initializer element not constant".
>
> Well looking at 6.6,
On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 12:11:01AM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> So in my toybox project (which I'm trying to build with tcc), I'm pulling a
> dirty trick to do dead code elimination on gcc. Basically, I have macros
> that boil down to:
>
> static const int blah = ptr || ptr || ptr || ptr || 0;
>
14 matches
Mail list logo
