Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2002 21:53:50 +0300
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: "Andrew Cottrell" <acottrel AT ihug DOT com DOT au>
Message-Id: <2110-Mon04Nov2002215350+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-Mailer: emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
CC: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <006f01c283e0$1f76d670$0100a8c0@p4> (acottrel@ihug.com.au)
Subject: Re: LIBC 2.04 new function atoll() and STDLIB long long changes
References: <001401c28231$db1d3cd0$0100a8c0 AT p4> <001201c282f0$7267c380$0100a8c0 AT p4> <006f01c283e0$1f76d670$0100a8c0 AT p4>
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> From: "Andrew Cottrell" <acottrel AT ihug DOT com DOT au>
> Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 19:56:13 +1100
> 
> In the future could there be a problem in the semantics which will cause a
> failure of long long v's long long int with regards to C++ which does type
> mangaling when generating a functionn name.

You mean, g++ mangles "long long foo" differently from "long long int
foo"?