Romain, Can you use int64_t and uint_t64 instead? IMHO that would be more useful than long long anyway.
Karl On Sep 19, 2013 5:33 PM, "Patrick Welche" <pr...@cam.ac.uk> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 12:51:52AM +0200, rom...@r-enthusiasts.com wrote: > > In Rcpp we'd like to do something useful for types such as long long > > and unsigned long long. > ... > > But apparently this is still not enough and on some versions of gcc > > (e.g. 4.7 something), -pedantic still generates the warnings unless > > we also use -Wno-long-long > > Can you also add -std=c++0x or is that considered as bad as adding > -Wno-long-long? > > (and why not use autoconf's AC_TYPE_LONG_LONG_INT and > AC_TYPE_UNSIGNED_LONG_LONG_INT for the tests?) > > Cheers, > > Patrick > > ______________________________________________ > R-devel@r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
