[cfe-dev] MS 128-bit literals don't always have the correct type

Dmitri Gribenko gribozavr at gmail.com
Sun Sep 23 11:27:32 PDT 2012

On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 9:24 PM, Cory Nelson <phrosty at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>> Currently Clang chooses the type of MS 128-bit literals (<digits>i128,
>> <digits>ui128) based on their value, as if there was no suffix, but
>> also allows an extended 128-bit type.
>> For example, on x86_64:
>> 1i128 is equivalent to 1,
>> 0x100000000i128 is same as 0x100000000L,
>> and finally 0x10000000000000000i128 is indeed a 128-bit literal.
>> I don't know if it is intended, but i128 is definitely treated
>> differently way from other MS literal suffixes we accept (for example,
>> i64 is essentially an alias for LL).
>> I don't have Visual Studio so I can not check how it handles these literals.
> VC++ does not support 128-bit literals.

I'm confused.  So why does Clang implement them?


(j){printf("%d\n",i);}}} /*Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com>*/

More information about the cfe-dev mailing list