On 2025-05-16 15:48:35 +0200, Charlie Gordon wrote:
> On 16 May 2025, at 14:29, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > This is portable because int64_t necessarily fits in a long long on
> > any platform.
>
> This is correct, but only since C23. Previous versions of the C
> Standard would have allowed `long
> On 16 May 2025, at 14:29, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
>
> On 2025-05-16 13:29:09 +0200, Charlie Gordon wrote:
>> The correct portable way to print `int64_t` values is this:
>> ```
>> #include
>> #include
>> #include
>>
>> int main(int argc, char **argv) {
>> int64_t a =123, b = 234;
>> prin
0;
> }
> output:
> 123 0
>
>
>
> -- 原始邮件 --
> 发件人: "avih" ;
> 发送时间: 2025年5月16日(星期五) 下午5:38
> 收件人: "tinycc-devel";
> 抄送: "Sun"<809935...@qq.com>;
> 主题: Re: [Tinycc-devel] find a bug
>
> I c
tf("%lu %lu\n",a,b);
>
> return 0;
> }
> output:
> 123 0
>
>
>
> -- 原始邮件 ----------
> 发件人: "avih" ;
> 发送时间: 2025年5月16日(星期五) 下午5:38
> 收件人: "tinycc-devel";
> 抄送: "Sun"<809935...@qq.com>;
> 主题: Re: [Tinycc
On 2025-05-16 13:29:09 +0200, Charlie Gordon wrote:
> The correct portable way to print `int64_t` values is this:
> ```
> #include
> #include
> #include
>
> int main(int argc, char **argv) {
>int64_t a =123, b = 234;
>printf("%" PRId64 " %" PRId64 "\n", a, b);
>return 0;
> }
> ```
a=123,b=234;
> printf("%lu %lu\n",a,b);
>
> return 0;
> }
> output:
> 123 0
>
>
>
> -- 原始邮件 --
> 发件人: "avih" ;
> 发送时间: 2025年5月16日(星期五) 下午5:38
> 收件人: "tinycc-devel";
> 抄送: "Sun"&l
rintf("%lu %lu\n",a,b);
>
> return 0;
> }
> output:
> 123 0
>
>
>
> -- 原始邮件 ------
> 发件人: "avih" ;
> 发送时间: 2025年5月16日(星期五) 下午5:38
> 收件人: "tinycc-devel";
> 抄送: "Sun"<809935...@qq.com>;
> 主题: Re: [Tin
Sun via Tinycc-devel [2025-05-16 11:03:50]:
#include
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
int64_t a=111,b=222;
printf("%d %d\n",a,b);
return 0;
}
output:
111 0
On Linux, it prints "111 222". Need to include , or
"int64_t" is undefined.
--
Hilsen Harald
__
I can confirm this output on Windows with mob f10ab130
(2025-03-28), but only with tcc 32 bit build.
And, at least on Windows, it also needs #include
However, this program is buggy, because the format %d is for
int (32 bit on Windows), while the values are 64 bit, so
a mismatch and undefined beh
