Message-ID: <003601c28451$de453490$0100a8c0@p4>
From: "Andrew Cottrell" <acottrel AT ihug DOT com DOT au>
To: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Cc: <djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>
References: <001401c28231$db1d3cd0$0100a8c0 AT p4> <001201c282f0$7267c380$0100a8c0 AT p4> <006f01c283e0$1f76d670$0100a8c0 AT p4> <2110-Mon04Nov2002215350+0200-eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Subject: Re: LIBC 2.04 new function atoll() and STDLIB long long changes
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 09:30:36 +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

> > 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"?
No not at the moment, but what about the future.....