heres the message in its entirety (i've since cut and pasted my response into
the issue via the web interface).
Delivered-To: greg@krypto.org
Received: by 10.103.118.18 with SMTP id v18cs239649mum;
Tue, 17 Feb 2009 19:32:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.181.61.7 with SMTP id o7mr2623482bkk.51.1234927936727;
Tue, 17 Feb 2009 19:32:16 -0800 (PST)
Return-Path: <roundup-admin@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Received: from psf.upfronthosting.co.za (bugs.python.org [88.198.142.26])
by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 19si6367756bwz.83.2009.02.17.19.32.15;
Tue, 17 Feb 2009 19:32:16 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 88.198.142.26 is neither permitted nor denied
by best guess record for domain of roundup-admin@psf.upfronthosting.co.za)
client-ip=88.198.142.26;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 88.198.142.26 is
neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of
roundup-admin@psf.upfronthosting.co.za)
smtp.mail=roundup-admin@psf.upfronthosting.co.za
Received: from psf.upfronthosting.co.za (localhost [10.0.0.1])
by psf.upfronthosting.co.za (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44F387863C
for <greg@krypto.org>; Wed, 18 Feb 2009 04:32:15 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
boundary="88.198.142.26.1006.25012.1234927935.280.1"
Subject: Failed issue tracker submission
To: g@psf.upfronthosting.co.za, r@psf.upfronthosting.co.za,
e@psf.upfronthosting.co.za, g@psf.upfronthosting.co.za, "",
k@psf.upfronthosting.co.za, r@psf.upfronthosting.co.za,
y@psf.upfronthosting.co.za, p@psf.upfronthosting.co.za,
t@psf.upfronthosting.co.za, o@psf.upfronthosting.co.za,
"."@psf.upfronthosting.co.za, o@psf.upfronthosting.co.za,
r@psf.upfronthosting.co.za, g@psf.upfronthosting.co.za
From: Python tracker <roundup-admin@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 03:32:15 +0000
X-Roundup-Name: Python tracker
X-Roundup-Loop: hello
X-Roundup-Version: 1.4.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <20090218033215.44F387863C@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
--88.198.142.26.1006.25012.1234927935.280.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
An unexpected error occurred during the processing
of your message. The tracker administrator is being
notified.
--88.198.142.26.1006.25012.1234927935.280.1
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: attachment
Content-Description: Message you sent
Return-Path: <greg@krypto.org>
X-Original-To: report@bugs.python.org
Delivered-To: roundup+tracker@psf.upfronthosting.co.za
Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com (fg-out-1718.google.com [72.14.220.158])
by psf.upfronthosting.co.za (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2324078590
for <report@bugs.python.org>; Wed, 18 Feb 2009 04:32:10 +0100 (CET)
Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 13so580429fge.20
for <report@bugs.python.org>; Tue, 17 Feb 2009 19:32:10 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.103.5.14 with SMTP id h14mr4199439mui.108.1234927929576; Tue,
17 Feb 2009 19:32:09 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <1234911749.63.0.657212726256.issue4258@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
References: <1225795512.12.0.546973896448.issue4258@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
<1234911749.63.0.657212726256.issue4258@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 19:32:09 -0800
Message-ID: <52dc1c820902171932p4441cbdfqc6a15a380b8a2d37@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [issue4258] Use 30-bit digits instead of 15-bit digits for Python
integers.
From: "Gregory P. Smith" <greg@krypto.org>
To: Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e649d9a290ce81046329101e
--0016e649d9a290ce81046329101e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> => I would suggest to use 2^30 base only if sizeof(long)>=8 (64 bits
CPU).
Thats not the correct test. Test for an actual 64-bit build target.
sizeof(long) and sizeof(long long) are not usefully related to that in any
sort of cross platform manner. On windows, we'd define the flag for 15 vs
30 bit longs in the build configs for the various build targets. On every
thing else (autoconf), we can use a configure test to check the same things
that platform.architecture() checks to return '32bit' vs '64bit'.
--0016e649d9a290ce81046329101e
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> <span class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"border-collapse: collap=
se; ">=3D> I would suggest to use 2^30 base only if sizeof(long)>=3D8=
(64 bits<br>CPU).</span><div><span class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"bor=
der-collapse: collapse;"><br>
</span></div><div><span class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"border-collapse=
: collapse;">Thats not the correct test. Test for an actual 64-bit bu=
ild target. sizeof(long) and sizeof(long long) are not usefully relat=
ed to that in any sort of cross platform manner. On windows, we'd=
define the flag for 15 vs 30 bit longs in the build configs for the variou=
s build targets. On every thing else (autoconf), we can use a configu=
re test to check the same things that platform.architecture() checks to ret=
urn '32bit' vs '64bit'.</span></div>
<div><br></div>
--0016e649d9a290ce81046329101e--
--88.198.142.26.1006.25012.1234927935.280.1--
|