Re: building on 32 extend 64 arch nix*
hi there, is there IRC room regarding wget dev (somewhere)? :) Hrvoje, is it a Croatian name?
Re: building on 32 extend 64 arch nix*
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 mm w wrote: hi there, is there IRC room regarding wget dev (somewhere)? :) We have #wget on freenode.net, where dev discussion is welcome; however, it is very low-participation atm (essentially, just myself, with a few lurkers); Hrvoje hasn't been seen there yet (*nudge* ;) ), and I'm not particularly versed on the particulars of the hashing algorithm just yet. I try to be available on #wget when I'm awake. Of course, I'm not always actively monitoring it... - -- Micah J. Cowan Programmer, musician, typesetting enthusiast, gamer... http://micah.cowan.name/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFH4HtK7M8hyUobTrERAt6nAJ4kkjmkM95uhQG2WYwB20UONTyOlACfVB/U jY4zxFX9wYA2Et6Q/UvJzfk= =pO3D -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: building on 32 extend 64 arch nix*
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 7:32 PM, Micah Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 mm w wrote: hi there, is there IRC room regarding wget dev (somewhere)? :) We have #wget on freenode.net, where dev discussion is welcome; however, it is very low-participation atm (essentially, just myself, with a few lurkers); Hrvoje hasn't been seen there yet (*nudge* ;) ), and I'm not particularly versed on the particulars of the hashing algorithm just yet. :D I try to be available on #wget when I'm awake. Of course, I'm not always actively monitoring it... thank you Micah, I asked because it is (sometimes) easier, than to send message about at line 45 of toto.c :D - -- Micah J. Cowan Programmer, musician, typesetting enthusiast, gamer... http://micah.cowan.name/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFH4HtK7M8hyUobTrERAt6nAJ4kkjmkM95uhQG2WYwB20UONTyOlACfVB/U jY4zxFX9wYA2Et6Q/UvJzfk= =pO3D -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- -mmw
building on 32 extend 64 arch nix*
Hello there, I ve two gcc warning regarding data size operations
src/hash.c
unsigned long
hash_pointer (const void *ptr)
{
.
#if SIZEOF_VOID_P 4
key += (key 44);
key ^= (key 54);
key += (key 36);
key ^= (key 41);
key += (key 42);
key ^= (key 34);
key += (key 39);
key ^= (key 44);
#endif
return (unsigned long) key;
}
this one is minor, the shift count is superior or equal to uintptr_t
size, /* quad needed */
the second one is in src/utils.c:1490
and I think is more problematic, integer overflow in expression
else if (n 10*(W)10) DIGITS_10 (10);
else if (n 100*(W)10)DIGITS_11 (10*(W)10);
else if (n 1000*(W)10) DIGITS_12 (100*(W)10);
else if (n 1*(W)10) DIGITS_13 (1000*(W)10);
else if (n 10*(W)10) DIGITS_14 (1*(W)10);
else if (n 100*(W)10)DIGITS_15 (10*(W)10);
else if (n 1000*(W)10) DIGITS_16 (100*(W)10);
else if (n 1*(W)10) DIGITS_17 (1000*(W)10);
else if (n 10*(W)10) DIGITS_18 (1*(W)10);
else DIGITS_19 (10*(W)10);
I can pach it but I would like to understand exactly what you do here
Cheers!
--
-mmw
Re: building on 32 extend 64 arch nix*
mm w [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: #if SIZEOF_VOID_P 4 key += (key 44); key ^= (key 54); key += (key 36); key ^= (key 41); key += (key 42); key ^= (key 34); key += (key 39); key ^= (key 44); #endif this one is minor, the shift count is superior or equal to uintptr_t size, /* quad needed */ What is the size of uintptr_t on your platform? If it is 4, the code should not be compiled on that platform. If it is 8, the shift count should be correct. If it is anything else, you have some work ahead of you. :-) the second one is in src/utils.c:1490 and I think is more problematic, integer overflow in expression There should be no integer overflow; I suspect SIZEOF_WGINT is incorrectly defined for you.
Re: building on 32 extend 64 arch nix*
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 1:57 PM, Hrvoje Niksic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: mm w [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: #if SIZEOF_VOID_P 4 key += (key 44); key ^= (key 54); key += (key 36); key ^= (key 41); key += (key 42); key ^= (key 34); key += (key 39); key ^= (key 44); #endif this one is minor, the shift count is superior or equal to uintptr_t size, /* quad needed */ What is the size of uintptr_t on your platform? If it is 4, the code should not be compiled on that platform. If it is 8, the shift count should be correct. If it is anything else, you have some work ahead of you. :-) ok I isolated the both methods and I m going to test the second one is in src/utils.c:1490 and I think is more problematic, integer overflow in expression There should be no integer overflow; I suspect SIZEOF_WGINT is incorrectly defined for you. Thank you -- -mmw
