0xffffffff when BFD64
Alexandre Oliva
aoliva@cygnus.com
Thu Apr 6 21:32:00 GMT 2000
On Apr 7, 2000, Alan Modra <alan@linuxcare.com.au> wrote:
> I guess we should check all hex constants in the range 0x80000000 to
> 0xffffffff, replacing them with const & N_ONES(32). Blechh.
I started doing something like that, but gave up. It's just too much
of a hassle. I'd rather just fix the problem at hand, which occurs
with a native compiler, and hope no other compiler has this problem.
After all, we can always recommend GCC :-)
OTOH, it wouldn't hurt to run something like this on the binutils
tree (minimally tested; may require GNU grep and GNU sed):
grep -lr '\<0x[89a-zA-Z][0-9a-zA-Z][0-9a-zA-Z][0-9a-zA-Z][0-9a-zA-Z][0-9a-zA-Z][0-9a-zA-Z][0-9a-zA-Z]\>' bfd opcodes binutils gas ld |
while read f; do
sed 's,\<0x[89a-zA-Z][0-9a-zA-Z][0-9a-zA-Z][0-9a-zA-Z][0-9a-zA-Z][0-9a-zA-Z][0-9a-zA-Z][0-9a-zA-Z]\>,(unsigned)(N_ONES(32) \& &),g' \
< $f > $f.new && mv $f.new $f
done
--
Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guaraná, see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Cygnus Solutions, a Red Hat company aoliva@{redhat, cygnus}.com
Free Software Developer and Evangelist CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp
oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org} Write to mailing lists, not to me
More information about the Binutils
mailing list