On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 20:37, Xueming Shen<xueming.s...@sun.com> wrote:
>> -------------
>> 31 @@ -39,7 +63,7 @@
>> 32 typedef unsigned int u4;
>> 33 # else
>> 34 # if (ULONG_MAX == 0xffffffffUL)
>> 35 - typedef unsigned long u4;
>> 36 + typedef uLong u4;
>> 37 # else
>> 38 # if (USHRT_MAX == 0xffffffffUL)
>> 39 typedef unsigned short u4;
>>
>> Using uLong in the above is probably not right,
>> since comparison against ULONG_MAX means
>> the corresponding type is unsigned long
>> (not that it matters)
>>
# if (UINT_MAX == 0xffffffffUL)
typedef unsigned int u4;
# else
# if (ULONG_MAX == 0xffffffffUL)
typedef unsigned long u4;
# else
# if (USHRT_MAX == 0xffffffffUL)
typedef unsigned short u4;
I believe that on all platforms where the JDK will be built,
the first test UINT_MAX == 0xffffffffUL will be true,
so the suggested change will never pass the preprocessor.
I believe it to both be wrong and to have no effect, and increase the
size of local changes - but still OK to commit if you insist!
Martin
