Re: XCode 2.0: what happened to long long?
Re: XCode 2.0: what happened to long long?
- Subject: Re: XCode 2.0: what happened to long long?
- From: Glen Low <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 19:28:06 +0800
On 27/06/2005, at 8:51 AM, Ken Brooks wrote: On 25 Jun 2005, at 14:25, Ken Brooks wrote:
This code quit compiling when I went to XCode 2.0. What's up with long long?
typedef unsigned long long PathTrace;
const PathTrace trace0 = 0; const PathTrace trace1 = 0x8000000000000000;
long long myvar = 0x8000000000000000;
The errors:
/Users/ken/Programs/Cat & Mouse 2view + AI/TestFile.cpp:4: error: integer constant is too large for 'long' type /Users/ken/Programs/Cat & Mouse 2view + AI/TestFile.cpp:6: error: integer constant is too large for 'long' type
At 2:30 PM +0100 6/25/05, Frederick Cheung wrote: You need to append LL or ULL to the constant (eg 0x8000000000000000ULL)
Fred
Thanks, Fred. That fixed it right up.
Now, where was this NEW REQUIREMENT documented? I read the 2.0 release notes carefully, and found nothing of the sort.
gcc 4.0 is trying to be more conformant to the C/C++ spec, which IIRC says that constants fit into the smallest of s/u char, short or int that will fit by default. long long is not in the standard.
Cheers, Glen Low
--- pixelglow software | simply brilliant stuff www.pixelglow.com aim: pixglen
|
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Xcode-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden