On Tue, 12 Jul 2011, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jul 2011 09:41 +0200, "IOhannes m zmoelnig" zmoelnig@iem.at
btw, wouldn't "%p" be the correct way to print a pointer? or are there some compat issues with that (e.g. non-POSIX)
All I know is that the rest of the Pd code uses .x%lx.
At the dev meeting in Graz in 2004, I was asked for a portable replacement for .x%lx, and I spontaneously said %p, but it turned out to be wrong, because on Linux/OSX, it doesn't print it exactly as .x%lx in 32-bit mode, because it prepends "0x"... and then I later realised that on Windows, it does something even more different.
In any case, any change from ".x%lx" to something else will cause a problem of backwards-compat AND forwards-compat across versions of Pd, which will need not only a recompilation but also a global search-and-replace (one that can't be done by sed). This is because sys_vgui is too low level, causing its users to need to copy-paste ".x%lx" all over the place.
This is why the Win64 pointer bug can't be fixed.
| Mathieu Bouchard ---- tél: +1.514.383.3801 ---- Villeray, Montréal, QC