[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: bitrotate
From: |
Bruno Haible |
Subject: |
Re: bitrotate |
Date: |
Mon, 1 Sep 2008 23:58:26 +0200 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.5.4 |
Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > There was a suggestion to support 64-bit rotates as well. That would
> > use uint64_t. Does stdint.m4 define some symbol that may be useful
> > here?
>
> I believe that UINT64_C (for writing an unsigned 64-bit integer
> literal) is defined if and only if uint64_t is available.
Let's compare UINT64_C and UINT64_MAX: Both are indicators of uint64_t.
But UINT64_C is not defined if
defined __cplusplus && ! defined __STDC_CONSTANT_MACROS
therefore I would use UINT64_MAX as a witness of uint64_t's presence.
Bruno
- Re: bitrotate, Simon Josefsson, 2008/09/01
- Re: bitrotate, Paolo Bonzini, 2008/09/01
- Re: bitrotate, Bruno Haible, 2008/09/01
- Re: bitrotate, Simon Josefsson, 2008/09/01
- Re: bitrotate, Simon Josefsson, 2008/09/01
- Re: bitrotate, Ben Pfaff, 2008/09/01
- Re: bitrotate,
Bruno Haible <=
- Re: bitrotate, Simon Josefsson, 2008/09/02
- Re: bitrotate, Eric Blake, 2008/09/02
- Re: bitrotate, Simon Josefsson, 2008/09/02