This web mail archive is frozen.
This page is part of a frozen web archive of this mailing list.
You can still navigate around this archive, but know that no new mails
have been added to it since July of 2016.
Click here to be taken to the new web archives of this list; it includes all the mails that are in this frozen archive plus all new mails that have been sent to the list since it was migrated to the new archives.
Brice Goglin, le Tue 13 Mar 2012 17:10:45 +0100, a écrit :
> Le 13/03/2012 17:04, Hartmut Kaiser a écrit :
> >>> But the problems I was seeing were not MSVC specific. It's a
> >>> proliferation of arcane (non-POSIX) function use (like strcasecmp,
> >>> etc.) missing use of HAVE_UNISTD_H, HAVE_STRINGS_H to wrap
> >>> non-standard headers, unsafe mixing of
> >>> int32<->int64 data types, reliance on int (and other types) having a
> >>> certain bit-size, totally unsafe shift operations, wide use of
> >>> (non-C-standard) gcc extensions, etc. Should I go on?
> > More investigation shows that the code currently assumes group (and
> > processor) masks to be 32 bit, which is not true on 64 bit systems.
> No. What it assumes is that you have a sane compiler where ulong is not
> 32bits on 64bits systems :)
Nothing says that an ulong is 64bit on a 64bit system. Only intptr_t can
be assumed to be 64bit. That's why we have HWLOC_BITS_PER_LONG actually.
In my memory I took care in the windows case that longs are 32bit, and
used DWORD for ulong. But since I had no test machine, I couldn't
promise it was working :)