Re: [PATCH] http: fix some printf format warnings on 32-bit builds

From: Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com>
Date: Nov 12, 2015, 11:58 UTC
Message-ID: <56447F02.2000105@ramsayjones.plus.com>
In-Reply-To: <5644232C.2060700@web.de>

On 12/11/15 05:27, Torsten Bögershausen wrote:

>>Ah. OK, so %ld for long and %lld for long long, I suppose.
> Only if you have a system that's support it.
> 
> Linux does, Windows not.

Sure, but I was speculating specifically about Eric's mac (which I have no experience with).

> 
>> Hmm, not that it matters, but I wonder what the PRId64 macro is. ;-)
> It's "I64d" for Windows, and "lld" for all Gnu based systems and others,

[On Gnu systems, I believe it is %lld on 32-bit and %ld on 64-bit.]

Again, I was commenting on Eric's mac, which _seems_ to allow the use of both %ld and %lld when printing 64-bit integers, so which does it choose for PRId64 ...

Show 9 quoted lines

> 
> When you do printf("%lld %ld", long_long_var, long_var),
> the "printf runtime" under Windows will treat "%lld" as "%ld", and print
> the lower part of long_long_var.
> And will not pull a long long from stack, but a long, resulting i all kinds of confusion
> 
> So whenever a long long is printed, I can warmly recommend to use
> 
> PRId64

Indeed.

ATB, Ramsay Jones