Re: [Python-Dev] bitfields - short - and xlc compiler

2016-03-20 Thread Terry Reedy
On 3/20/2016 4:04 PM, Andrew Barnert via Python-Dev wrote: Agreed. But I think the test is reasonable on at least MSVC, gcc, clang, and icc. So what you need is some way to run the test on those compilers, but not on compilers that can't handle it. The test could be conditioned on the

Re: [Python-Dev] bitfields - short - and xlc compiler

2016-03-20 Thread Andrew Barnert via Python-Dev
On Mar 20, 2016, at 09:07, Michael Felt wrote: > >> On 2016-03-18 05:57, Andrew Barnert via Python-Dev wrote: >> Yeah, C99 (6.7.2.1) allows "a qualified or unqualified version of _Bool, >> signed int, unsigned int, or some other implementation-defined type", and >> same

Re: [Python-Dev] bitfields - short - and xlc compiler

2016-03-20 Thread Michael Felt
On 2016-03-18 05:57, Andrew Barnert via Python-Dev wrote: Yeah, C99 (6.7.2.1) allows "a qualified or unqualified version of _Bool, signed int, unsigned int, or some other implementation-defined type", and same for C11. This means that a compiler could easily allow an implementation-defined

Re: [Python-Dev] bitfields - short - and xlc compiler

2016-03-19 Thread Andrew Barnert via Python-Dev
On Mar 17, 2016, at 18:35, MRAB wrote: > >> On 2016-03-18 00:56, Michael Felt wrote: >> Update: >> Is this going to be impossible? > From what I've been able to find out, the C89 standard limits bitfields to > int, signed int and unsigned int, and the C99 standard

Re: [Python-Dev] bitfields - short - and xlc compiler

2016-03-19 Thread Michael Felt
Update: Is this going to be impossible? test_short fails om AIX when using xlC in any case. How terrible is this? == FAIL: test_shorts (ctypes.test.test_bitfields.C_Test)

[Python-Dev] bitfields - short - and xlc compiler

2016-03-19 Thread Michael Felt
a) hope this is not something you expect to be on -list, if so - my apologies! Getting this message (here using c99 as compiler name, but same issue with xlc as compiler name) c99 -qarch=pwr4 -qbitfields=signed -DNDEBUG -O -I. -IInclude -I./Include

Re: [Python-Dev] bitfields - short - and xlc compiler

2016-03-19 Thread MRAB
On 2016-03-18 00:56, Michael Felt wrote: Update: Is this going to be impossible? From what I've been able to find out, the C89 standard limits bitfields to int, signed int and unsigned int, and the C99 standard added _Bool, although some compilers allow other integer types too. It looks like