Thread overview | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
July 25, 2002 printf and "long long" | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Could someone tell me how to printf the long long int's (64 bit). I've looked for the docs on it and maybe I've missed it. I've got a utility I am writing where I need to report on files larger than 4 Gig and some of the numbers I am keeping track of can easily exceed unsigned longs. Thanks! John D. Lance JDLance@prodigy.net |
July 25, 2002 Re: printf and "long long" | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to John Lance | To print long long (64-bit integer) use %lld or %llu. But since you posted this in DOS thread, I doubt that you can have files larger than 2Gb in DOS. Can you? Nic Tiger. "John Lance" <JDLance@prodigy.net> wrote in message news:ahnr5o$1aml$1@digitaldaemon.com... > Could someone tell me how to printf the long long int's (64 bit). I've looked for the docs on it and maybe I've missed it. > > I've got a utility I am writing where I need to report on files larger than > 4 Gig and some of the numbers I am keeping track of can easily exceed unsigned longs. > > Thanks! > > John D. Lance > JDLance@prodigy.net > > |
July 25, 2002 Re: printf and "long long" | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Nic Tiger | Also, the 64 bit long long type is not implemented for 16 bit models; just 32 bit models. "Nic Tiger" <nictiger@pt.comcor.ru> wrote in message news:ahog45$246f$1@digitaldaemon.com... > To print long long (64-bit integer) use %lld or %llu. > But since you posted this in DOS thread, I doubt that you can have files > larger than 2Gb in DOS. Can you? |
July 26, 2002 Re: printf and "long long" | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Nic Tiger | You're quite correct. I posted to the wrong group. Thanks to those replying for all for the info though. I am using Windows Console mode for the utility. Since I am here.... I did notice that those long long's hog the processor (and probably the general machine architecture) a whole lot more than I was hoping for. The program execution speed dropped quite noticeably from just using unsigned longs. I am not so up on the processor architecture as I should be at the moment. Don't the Pentium III's have 64 bit wide registers anywhere in their construction that the compiler is able to use for register variables? I know it is basically a 32 bit device, but can't some registers can be "grouped" where they would be used and act as 64 bit registers instead of 2 - 32 bit registers? The performance hit was enough to consider two versions of the utility. Thanks again, and Walter, YOU'RE THE MAN. I can't tell you how happy I was to see that this product is still going forward. I first came across it as Symantec C++ version 7.5 and I loved the ease of use and overall speed(s) and configurability of the product. John Lance JDLance@prodigy.net |
July 26, 2002 Re: printf and "long long" | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to John Lance | "John Lance" <JDLance@prodigy.net> wrote in message news:ahqosr$1ibq$1@digitaldaemon.com... > I am not so up on the processor architecture as I should be at the moment. Don't the Pentium III's have 64 bit wide registers anywhere in their construction that the compiler is able to use for register variables? I know it is basically a 32 bit device, but can't some registers can be "grouped" where they would be used and act as 64 bit registers instead of 2 - 32 bit registers? No, not that I've found <g>. > Thanks again, and Walter, YOU'RE THE MAN. I can't tell you how happy I was > to see that this product is still going forward. I first came across it as > Symantec C++ version 7.5 and I loved the ease of use and overall speed(s) and configurability of the product. Thanks! |
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation