Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com From: "Mija Gourlay" To: Subject: RE: INT64_MAX incorrectly defined in stdint.h Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 12:03:40 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: Hold up... I changed mirror sites and now I'm getting a big fat download. I guess the mirror I used hadn't caught the new release yet. I'm still downloading, but I figure this will solve the problem. Sorry. -----Original Message----- From: Mija Gourlay [mailto:mijagourlay AT earthlink DOT net] Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 11:59 AM To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: INT64_MAX incorrectly defined in stdint.h I noticed that the release notes for today's new release claims the following: - Correctly define *64_MAX. (Corinna Vinschen) I have the latest version, as far as I know, since I ran "update" today. First, I noticed no change to stdint.h. Second, I noticed that INT64_MAX is still incorrectly defined: stdint.h:79:#define INT64_MAX (9223372036854775807) This literal should have a "LL" suffix. Otherwise, compiling the following code generates an error: int64_t i64Max = INT64_MAX ; warning: integer constant is too large for "long" type So... I'm confused. Has stdint.h been updated? If so, why didn't I get it today when I updated Cygwin? If not, where, exactly, did the *64_MAX macros get "correctly defined", as the release notes indicate? Thanks. ______________________ Dr. Michael J. Gourlay -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/