[Top post of a history note for powerpc and wchar_t's type in FreeBSD. The
history is from looking around in svn.]
[The below is not a complaint or a request for a change. It just looks like int
for wchar_t for powerpc was a choice made long ago for simpler code given
FreeBSD's pre-existing
On 2016-Jul-13, at 6:00 PM, Andrey Chernov wrote:
> On 13.07.2016 11:53, Mark Millard wrote:
>> [The below does note that TARGET=powerpc has a mix of signed wchar_t and
>> unsigned char types and most architectures have both being signed types.]
>
> POSIX says nothing about
On 13.07.2016 11:53, Mark Millard wrote:
> [The below does note that TARGET=powerpc has a mix of signed wchar_t and
> unsigned char types and most architectures have both being signed types.]
POSIX says nothing about wchar_t and char should be the same (un)signed.
It is arm ABI docs may say so
[The below does note that TARGET=powerpc has a mix of signed wchar_t and
unsigned char types and most architectures have both being signed types.]
On 2016-Jul-11, at 8:57 PM, Andrey Chernov wrote:
> On 12.07.2016 5:44, Mark Millard wrote:
>> My understanding of the criteria for __WCHAR_MIN and
On Tue, 2016-07-12 at 00:37 +, Andrey A. Chernov wrote:
> Author: ache
> Date: Tue Jul 12 00:37:48 2016
> New Revision: 302601
> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/302601
>
> Log:
> I don't know why unsigned int is choosed for wchar_t here, but
The ARM ABI requires wchar_t to
On 12.07.2016 11:35, Andrew Turner wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 00:37:48 + (UTC)
> "Andrey A. Chernov" wrote:
>
>> Author: ache
>> Date: Tue Jul 12 00:37:48 2016
>> New Revision: 302601
>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/302601
>>
>> Log:
>> I don't know
On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 00:37:48 + (UTC)
"Andrey A. Chernov" wrote:
> Author: ache
> Date: Tue Jul 12 00:37:48 2016
> New Revision: 302601
> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/302601
>
> Log:
> I don't know why unsigned int is choosed for wchar_t here, but
>
On 12.07.2016 5:44, Mark Millard wrote:
> My understanding of the criteria for __WCHAR_MIN and __WCHAR_MAX:
>
> A) __WCHAR_MIN and __WCHAR_MAX: same type as the integer promotion of
> ___wchar_t (if that is distinct).
> B) __WCHAR_MIN is the low value for ___wchar_t as an integer type; not
>
https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-src-head/2016-July/088998.html shows:
> Modified: head/sys/arm/include/_types.h
> ==
> --- head/sys/arm/include/_types.h Mon Jul 11 23:15:54 2016
> (r302600)
> +++
Author: ache
Date: Tue Jul 12 00:37:48 2016
New Revision: 302601
URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/302601
Log:
I don't know why unsigned int is choosed for wchar_t here, but WCHAR_MAX
should be <= WINT_MAX. It is bigger, __UINT_MAX > INT32_MAX
Modified:
10 matches
Mail list logo