Re: Options for signed 64bit ints

[Eric Wing <ewmailing@...>]

On 7/31/13, Andrew Starks <andrew.starks@trms.com> wrote:
> I'm working with a library that deals in nano time (10^7 == 1 second).
>
> I have to convert between clock many bases, which means getting very
> small or very huge numbers.
>
> Simplicity would wash over me if I were dealing with 64-bit signed
> ints; the native C type. As it is, I'm complecting things in the
> service of avoiding common scenarios where I'm loosing precision.
>
> So, if I decide that I can't live without 64bit signed ints: User
> data? Some kind of awesome library**?
>
> lbc brings the openssl dependency, which is "a thing", especially on
> Windows. (don't know what openssl's license is, either).
>
> Is there anything else out there that works with 5.2, or is this
> simple enough that I should just use the C-API and quit whining?
>
> --Andrew
>
>
> ** Lua 5.3 Work1? This is for production, but this project won't see
> the light of day for about a year. If (most likely when, if history is
> a guide) we beat 5.3 to production, we'd have to go back-port some
> other method. Since this isn't a huge deal breaker, I'm okay with that
> risk, for even a small chance of success. That is, I kind of want to
> be talked into this option, but it seems to be lunacy, at this point
> in 5.3 development cycle.
>
>

On a 64-bit system (Mac), I use Lua 5.1 + the LNUM patch to handle
64-bit integers (for LuaCocoa). However, I am strongly tempted by Lua
5.3 Work 1 and have been thinking about using it and pretending it is
Lua 5.2 with implementation details like the LNUM patch.

-Eric
-- 
Beginning iPhone Games Development
http://playcontrol.net/iphonegamebook/