Wayne,
In 'C' long long's are 64-bit on 32-bit architectures; however,
and unfortunately, long long is only part of the 'C' standard
and not part of the 'C++' standard.
i.e. in stdint.h you find
typedef long long int64_t;
typedef unsinged long long u_int64_4;
but stdint.h is a 'C' header file
On 4/10/2012 4:41 PM, Brian F. G. Bidulock wrote:
> Wayne,
>
> On Tue, 10 Apr 2012, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
>>
>> On 64-bit builds, integers are 64 bits so it becomes meaningless at that
>> point. Even on 32 bit hardware, there are much more pressing issues
>> that need to be resolved.
>
> On 64-
Wayne,
On Tue, 10 Apr 2012, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
>
> On 64-bit builds, integers are 64 bits so it becomes meaningless at that
> point. Even on 32 bit hardware, there are much more pressing issues
> that need to be resolved.
On 64-bit architecture int's are 32-bits. long's are 64-bits.
--bri
On 04/10/2012 11:55 AM, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
> On 4/10/2012 11:40 AM, Brian Sidebotham wrote:
>> On 8 April 2012 13:14, Edwin van den Oetelaar
>> wrote:
>>> -- Forwarded message --
>>> From: Edwin van den Oetelaar
>>> Date: Sun, Apr 8, 2012 at 12:28 PM
>>> Subject: remarks about
>
>
> > But +/- 2.15m is ~ 4.3m
> >
> > I don't see any point in changing anything that has already been done
> > in order to support a PCB larger than 4 metres. The patch would simply
> > be to move coordinates to a 64-bit int anyway, so it would not be too
> > difficult should someone come along
On 4/10/2012 11:40 AM, Brian Sidebotham wrote:
> On 8 April 2012 13:14, Edwin van den Oetelaar
> wrote:
>> -- Forwarded message --
>> From: Edwin van den Oetelaar
>> Date: Sun, Apr 8, 2012 at 12:28 PM
>> Subject: remarks about the internal nanometer resolution
>> To: KiCad Develop
On 8 April 2012 13:14, Edwin van den Oetelaar
wrote:
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Edwin van den Oetelaar
> Date: Sun, Apr 8, 2012 at 12:28 PM
> Subject: remarks about the internal nanometer resolution
> To: KiCad Developers
>
>
> First of, I have not followed the discussion
Hi all,
maybe 2m could be an important limitation. What is the limitation of
using a 10 nm unit?
I think it is important to talk about it, especially now that somebody
has brought up an apparent limitation.
cheers
Fabrizio
On Sun, Apr 8, 2012 at 11:23 PM, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
> On 04/08/2012
On 04/08/2012 02:28 PM, Edwin van den Oetelaar wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 8, 2012 at 9:08 PM, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
>> On 04/08/2012 07:14 AM, Edwin van den Oetelaar wrote:
>>> -- Forwarded message --
>>> From: Edwin van den Oetelaar
>>> Date: Sun, Apr 8, 2012 at 12:28 PM
>>> Subject:
On 04/08/2012 07:14 AM, Edwin van den Oetelaar wrote:
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Edwin van den Oetelaar
> Date: Sun, Apr 8, 2012 at 12:28 PM
> Subject: remarks about the internal nanometer resolution
> To: KiCad Developers
>
>
> First of, I have not followed the discussion
-- Forwarded message --
From: Edwin van den Oetelaar
Date: Sun, Apr 8, 2012 at 12:28 PM
Subject: remarks about the internal nanometer resolution
To: KiCad Developers
First of, I have not followed the discussion about the NanoMeter.
I do have some remarks.
>From an engineering st
11 matches
Mail list logo
