From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Windows 64 port Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 20:08:51 +0200 Message-ID: <83mx81cy18.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20120219211800.0000558f@unknown> <834numv7js.fsf@gnu.org> <4F428780.8070902@cs.ucla.edu> <4F4D507F.7030008@cs.ucla.edu> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1330538874 17359 80.91.229.3 (29 Feb 2012 18:07:54 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 18:07:54 +0000 (UTC) Cc: eggert@cs.ucla.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org, ajmr@ilovetortilladepatatas.com To: Fabrice Popineau Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 29 19:07:52 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1S2nwN-0007k6-Nr for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 19:07:51 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37090 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S2nwM-0000o4-Vo for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 13:07:50 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:49404) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S2nwJ-0000nn-1v for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 13:07:48 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S2nwC-0000iu-GD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 13:07:46 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout21.012.net.il ([80.179.55.169]:36213) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S2nwC-0000ii-89 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 13:07:40 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout21.012.net.il by a-mtaout21.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0M0600K00271TI00@a-mtaout21.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 20:06:45 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.124.119.92]) by a-mtaout21.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0M0600KXG2B6JGC0@a-mtaout21.012.net.il>; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 20:06:45 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 80.179.55.169 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:148839 Archived-At: > From: Fabrice Popineau > Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 23:39:46 +0100 > Cc: Eli Zaretskii , AJMR , emacs-devel@gnu.org > > > > There is something wrong around lib/strftime.c:946 > > > if (negative_number) > > > u_number_value = - u_number_value; > > > > > > u_number_value being unsigned, this is wrong. > > > > I don't see anything wrong there. The value of > > -X is well-defined if X is unsigned int; it's > > equivalent to ~X + 1. Can you supply a test case > > illustrating the actual bug? > > > > > When my compiler issues a warning like : > > unsigned.c > unsigned.c(3) : warning C4146: unary minus operator applied to unsigned > type, result still unsigned > > I tend to care about it. If it is on purpose, then I'm ok with it albeit I > would have prefered something less error prone > (I mean human interpretation error :-) ) I agree that such confusing code, even if it does its job correctly, is bad for maintainability. At the very least, it warrants a comment explaining why things are done that way. Rewriting it not to negate unsigned values with arithmetic operations would be even better. > I did it because I'm using it this way, but that should be doable with > MINGW x64 (or so I guess). > With the MS tools, emacs does not compile out of the box. There are errors. > There are also lots of warnings and when something does not work, I try to > remove warnings first. Please go on, I have no doubt that resolving these issues will make the code cleaner and clearer, and of course will also help the MinGW64 build when the time comes. > All in all, at least for the record, it may help people who would need an > emacs/x64/windows this way. Right. Thanks.