That does solve the problem of the generated code.<div><br></div><div>Thanks a lot.</div><div><br></div><div>Arushi<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 3:34 AM, Duncan Sands <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:baldrick@free.fr">baldrick@free.fr</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">Hi Arushi,<div class="im"><br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
I got this from C code compiled by llvm-gcc.<br>
<br>
There is a consistent prototype for the function<br>
<br>
TypHandle Cyclotomic ( hdRes, n, m )<br>
TypHandle hdRes;<br>
long n, m;<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
I just remembered that Kernighan and Ritchie style declarations like this don't<br>
have the semantics you might expect. In particular this is not equivalent to<br>
saying<br>
TypHandle Cyclotomic ( TypHandle hdRes, long n, long m )<br>
If you change the declaration to the previous line, does the nasty bitcasting<br>
go away?<br>
<br>
Ciao, Duncan.<br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>