[cffi-devel] New patches: 3-Feb-2006: x86-64

[Hoehle, Joerg-Cyril]

James Bielman wrote:
>> Could you please confirm my supposition that long-long works out of
>> the box with clisp on your amd64 machine?
>How would I go about testing this?  I don't see a LONG-LONG type in
>the FFI package (or do I need a CVS version?  I'm using the latest
>release).
Map cffi:long-long to ffi:sint64 and ffi:uint64.
I have not added an ffi:long-long type.  Not ideal, but good enough.

I've now updated CVS CLISP to support interfacing to a 64bit "long long" entity on all platforms where some 64bit type is available (e.g. gcc, MS-VC).

In other words, cffi-features:no-long-long should be removed from cffi-clisp (or you may wish to conditionalize on the version number or whatever, but that's too restrictive since e.g. I'm convinced that ffi:uint64 has always worked on 64bit machines, where long=long long)).

Please test & report if it fails.

Furthermore, I think you need to think about what CFFI should do e.g. on the MS-VC platform.  It does not have a "long long", it's called __int64 instead.  But this is a 64bit type (and possibly some system structures or libraries use that, I don't know).
CLISP's ffi:uint64 works with __int64.

Actually, given my tests, I'd not recommend trying to call MS-VC __int64 receiving or returning functions via gcc long long or vice-versa.  They may have incompatible calling conventions (speculation, but MS-VC6 has a different one from GCC4 on Linux/i686. I haven't tested cygwin/mingw).
Pointers to such 64bit ints are no problem at all.

Regards,
	Jorg Hohle.