Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "e12da2e8".
2004 Jul 08
2
[LLVMdev] UnitTests/2002-05-19-DivTest.c
The above-mentioned test contains this:
long B53 = - (1LL << 53);
strictly speaking, this is not correct code. The C standard says about shift:
"if the value of the first operator is ... or greater than ... the width of
the promoted left operand, the behaviour is underfined".
Thouhts?
- Volodya
2004 Jul 08
0
[LLVMdev] UnitTests/2002-05-19-DivTest.c
Vladimir Prus wrote:
> The above-mentioned test contains this:
>
> long B53 = - (1LL << 53);
>
> strictly speaking, this is not correct code. The C standard says about
> shift: "if the value of the first operator is ... or greater than ... the
> width of the promoted left operand, the behaviour is underfined".
Forget this, I've missed the 'LL'
2004 Jul 08
3
[LLVMdev] UnitTests/2002-05-19-DivTest.c
...ifier is '%ld'. What
about the attached patch?
- Volodya
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 2002-05-19-DivTest.diff
Type: text/x-diff
Size: 614 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20040708/e12da2e8/attachment.diff>