RFR(XS): 8168490: Use the LL/ULL suffixes to define 64-bit integer literals on Windows

[David Holmes]

On 24/10/2016 5:12 PM, Volker Simonis wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 2:43 AM, David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com> wrote:
>> Hi Volker,
>>
>> On 22/10/2016 1:35 AM, Volker Simonis wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> can I please have a review and sponsor for the following trivial fix:
>>>
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/2016/8168490/
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8168490
>>>
>>> Currently we use the i64/ui64 suffixes to declare 64-bit integer
>>> literals on Windows (see
>>> src/share/vm/utilities/globalDefinitions_visCPP.hpp).
>>>
>>> Unfortunately this suffix is not known to Eclipse so most of a hotspot
>>> files have errors in an Eclipse project (e.g. NULL is defined as
>>> '0i64' which gives a syntax error in Eclipse, but NULL is used in most
>>> hotspot of the source files).
>>>
>>> Fortunately VS supports the more standard conforming LL/ULL suffixes
>>> (see http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/integer_literal) since
>>> at least VS2010 (see
>>> https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/00a1awxf(v=vs.100).aspx).I
>>> therefore propose to change the suffix for integer literals from
>>> i64/ui64 to LL/ULL on Windows.
>>
>>
>> In the sense that this changes the VIS specific code to use a more stand
>> conforming form this seems fine.
>>
>> But as I wrote in the bug report, should we even be using this file with non
>> Visual Studio compilers?
>>
>
> What I meant with "Eclipse doesn't understand" the suffix is that the
> Eclipse C++ parser doesn't understand it. Eclipse just parses all the
> C++ files which belong to a project in order to build up its code
> database for code navigation. As such it reads
> globalDefinitions_visCPP.hpp on Windows (if we configure a
> corresponding project) or  globalDefinitions_gcc.hpp on Linux, etc...
>
> This does not mean that we are using globalDefinitions_visCPP.hpp for
> building with another compiler. And we have no IDE-specific headers
> (this actually makes no sense since the IDEs should use the same
> settings which are used for the actual builds).
>
> Not sure about other IDEs, but Eclipse's C++ parser doesn't understand
> the i64/ui64 suffix and as there is a better, more standard-conforming
> way of declaring 64-bit integer literals on Windows I've just proposed
> the cleanup.
>
> Does this answer your question?

Yes - thanks for clarifying.

David

> Thank you and best egards,
> Volker
>
>
>> Thanks,
>> David
>>
>>
>>> Thank you and best regards,
>>> Volker
>>>
>>