[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: 64-bit cleaning [PATCH]
From: |
Jan Hudec |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: 64-bit cleaning [PATCH] |
Date: |
Sun, 7 Sep 2003 11:05:55 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.4i |
On Sat, Sep 06, 2003 at 22:44:42 -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> Miles Bader <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > John Goerzen <address@hidden> writes:
> >> That is an interesting observation, though what it doesn't express is
> >> whether different platforms actually react positvely to passing things
> >> of different sizes along.
> >
> > What does that mean? I think in general on a sane system you can always
> > pass ints or pointers in a long, and be able to restore them later
> > without damage.
>
> What it means is there is an open question in my mind:
>
> Can you pass a small int-like thing in a larger pointer and be
> able to reliably extract it later, in a portable fashion?
>
> For instance, can you reliably pass a 32-bit int in a 64-bit void *
> and expect it to work everywhere? Or more to the point, pass an int
> in a void * and expect it to work even when they are different sizes?
>
> I do know that it does work on Alpha, but I do not know if it actually
> works elsewhere, and it is definately not a good way to go in any
> case.
Yes, it's done in Gtk and works.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jan 'Bulb' Hudec
<address@hidden>
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] 64-bit cleaning [PATCH], Momchil Velikov, 2003/09/06
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] 64-bit cleaning [PATCH], Stephen J. Turnbull, 2003/09/08
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] 64-bit cleaning [PATCH], Stephen J. Turnbull, 2003/09/09