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
