>  
>  On Sat, Jun 30, 2001 at 10:42:32AM -0700, Hal Morris wrote:
>  > You didn't explicitly ask for it, but here it is.
>  > Thanks,  Hal Morris,  UTS Global, LLC
>  
>  Thanks
>  > # '0' ne '4294967296',	4294967295	=> P n + P vs P + P
>  > # ok, as string ++ of max_uv is "4294967296", numeric is 0
>  
>  Aargh. Why didn't I notice that before?
>  
>  I take it that you don't see
>  
>  $ perl -e '$a=shift; $a++; printf "%u\n", $a' 4294967295
>  4294967295
>  

Actually, I DO get 4294967295
>  
>  Could you try the following test program (in the perl build directory)
>  and send the results.
>  
>  #include "EXTERN.h"
>  #include "perl.h"
>  int main (void) {
>    char buffer[256];
>    sprintf (buffer, "UV_MAX_P1='"STRINGIFY(UV_MAX_P1)"'\n%.32g",UV_MAX_P1);
>    puts(buffer);
>    sprintf (buffer, "IV_MAX_P1='"STRINGIFY(IV_MAX_P1)"'\n%.32g",IV_MAX_P1);
>    puts(buffer);
>    sprintf (buffer, "UV_MAX_P1_HALF='"STRINGIFY(UV_MAX_P1_HALF)"'\n%.32g",
>            UV_MAX_P1_HALF);
>    puts(buffer);
>    return 0;
>  }

juno>  ./nicks-test
UV_MAX_P1='(4.0 * (1 + ((((unsigned long)4294967295u)) > > 2)))'
4294967296
IV_MAX_P1='(2.0 * (1 + (((UV)((long)2147483647)) > > 1)))'
2147483648
UV_MAX_P1_HALF='(2.0 * (1 + ((((unsigned long)4294967295u)) > > 2)))'
2147483648
juno>  
>  
>  Could you try the not-quite-one-liner:
>  
>  perl -e 'foreach (0..3,28..34,62..64) {print "$_\t", ~0 >> $_; {use integer; print "\t", ~
0 > > $_, "\n"}}'
>  
>  for which I get
>  
>  0       4294967295      -1
>  1       2147483647      -1
>  2       1073741823      -1
>  3       536870911       -1
>  28      15      -1
>  29      7       -1
>  30      3       -1
>  31      1       -1
>  32      0       -1
>  33      0       -1
>  34      0       -1
>  62      0       -1
>  63      0       -1
>  64      0       -1

juno>  sh ni*2.sh                           
0       4294967295      -1
1       2147483647      -1
2       1073741823      -1
3       536870911       -1
28      15      -1
29      7       -1
30      3       -1
31      1       -1
32      0       -1
33      0       -1
34      0       -1
62      0       -1
63      0       -1
64      4294967295      -1
>  
>  here.
>  I'm curious if you get output that looks like this:
>  
>  0       4294967295    -1
>  1       4294967295    -1
>  2       4294967295    -1
>  3       4294967295    -1
>  
>  if you do (and maybe even if you don't) could you try the following patch
>  to see if it changes anything:
>  
>  --- perl.h.orig Thu Jun 28 16:17:15 2001
>  +++ perl.h      Sat Jun 30 17:40:25 2001
>  @@ -2165,17 +2165,17 @@
>      May find that some broken compiler will want the value cast to I32.
>      [after the shift, as signed >> may not be as secure as unsigned >>]
>   */
>  -#define I32_MAX_P1 (2.0 * (1 + (((U32)I32_MAX) >> 1)))
>  -#define U32_MAX_P1 (4.0 * (1 + ((U32_MAX) >> 2)))
>  +#define I32_MAX_P1 (2.0 * (1 + (((U32)I32_MAX) / 2)))
>  +#define U32_MAX_P1 (4.0 * (1 + ((U32_MAX) / 4)))
>   /* For compilers that can't correctly cast NVs over 0x7FFFFFFF (or
>      0x7FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF) to an unsigned integer. In the future, sizeof(UV)
>      may be greater than sizeof(IV), so don't assume that half max UV is max IV.
>   */
>  -#define U32_MAX_P1_HALF (2.0 * (1 + ((U32_MAX) >> 2)))
>  +#define U32_MAX_P1_HALF (2.0 * (1 + ((U32_MAX) / 4)))
>   
>  -#define UV_MAX_P1 (4.0 * (1 + ((UV_MAX) >> 2)))
>  -#define IV_MAX_P1 (2.0 * (1 + (((UV)IV_MAX) >> 1)))
>  -#define UV_MAX_P1_HALF (2.0 * (1 + ((UV_MAX) >> 2)))
>  +#define UV_MAX_P1 (4.0 * (1 + ((UV_MAX) / 4)))
>  +#define IV_MAX_P1 (2.0 * (1 + (((UV)IV_MAX) / 2)))
>  +#define UV_MAX_P1_HALF (2.0 * (1 + ((UV_MAX) / 4)))
>   
>   /* This may look like unnecessary jumping through hoops, but converting
>      out of range floating point values to integers *is* undefined behaviour,
>  
>  Thanks,
>  
>  UTS isn't like a Cray in any way is it?
>  
>  Nicholas Clark
>  

I'll let you know how this turns out shortly.

UTS is basically a SysVr4.2 UNIX on IBM 370/390 architecture.  I don't
know anything about Cray's O.S., but if you're talking about the basic
Cray architecture, as I knew it 10-15 years ago, I don't think they're
similar.  It does not, at any rate, have 36-bit words.

Thanks for your help.