Cross-posted to IBM-MAIN and MVS-OE. I have the following code fragment in an inline function, compiled by the IBM XLC compiler as C++:
unsigned long long valueToTest; unsigned int testWord; testWord = valueToTest >> 32; It *appears* to me (from somewhat circumstantial evidence in a much more complex big picture) when valueToTest has a value of 0x0034000000000000 then - If I compile Opt(0),NoInline then testWord gets the value I expect, 0x00340000; but - If I compile Opt(2),Inline then testWord gets a value of 0. Questions: 1. Does that seem plausible? That the code would work as intended Opt(0),NoInline but that with Opt(2),Inline the compiler would (I am guessing here) first cast valueToTest to an int of 0, then shift it right 32, and then assign it to testWord? 2. What should I code to avoid that? I guess I could shift valueToTest first (I don't need it again) and then in a separate statement assign it to testWord. Is that the "proper" coding technique? It's fairly involved to test the whole thing so I took the liberty of imposing on you folks rather than just trying stuff. Thanks much. Charles ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
