Re: [Swig-devel] tcl maintainer?

[Kjell W. <kje...@gm...>]

On 9/11/07, William S Fulton <ws...@fu...> wrote:
> The test-suite has examples which use the typemaps in the patch. I had
> to tweak the typemaps slightly to use limits.h to get the definitions of
> LONG_LONG_MAX / LLONG_MAX. However, even with the latest gcc, this does
> not compile using default compiler options. It seems that the compiler
> will accept the 'long long' by default, but not these macros. Both 'long
> long' and these macros are in the C99 standard and everything compiles
> if we pass the --std=c99. Personally I think that gcc should be using
> the C99 standard by default but as it is not, we need to think up a
> better solution. I'm not keen on changing the compiler options we test
> with unless we really have to.

Ah, right. I had forgotten about this little "feature".

The most common workaround for this issue (that I know of) is to add
-std=gnu99 to CFLAGS (which is nowhere near as draconian as passing
-std=c99)

> Is there anything in tcl.h that can help?

This is likely going to bite the other languages, too (at least,
anything that wants to parse a long
long correctly). Perhaps some configure.in magic? There's a nice
template in the OpenSSH sources that tries 1) the correct header, 2)
-std=gnu99, and finally 3) compute the constants directly.

I don't believe LONG_LONG_MAX is particularly portable either.

I think adding the requisite magic to configure.in would be the right
way to go (until the compilers catch up)


> >> Perhaps this the problem perl
> >> testcase:
> >> Checking testcase li_std_string (with run test) under perl5
> >> SWIG Perl test failed:
> >>
> >> TypeError in method 'Foo_testl', argument 2 of type 'unsigned long long'
> >
> > I don't think it is, but that one should be fairly straightforward to
> > track down, too. If I get a sec, I'll have a peek.
> >
> Your help here will be much appreciated as I'd like to fix this before
> releasing 1.3.32.

I'll have a look and get back to you.