Migrating source code from 32 to 64 bits

[Chanquete]

Hi people!
I'm compiling an app. from Pa-RISC 32 bits to Itanium 64 bits. I compile it fine (cc +DD64), linking with 64 bits libraries (i also use oracle libraries). I solved the warning messages that i didn't see when i compile under 32 bits.
I think all is OK. But the same program show different results that under 32 bits.
My questions are: Are there any kind of differences in source code (ANSI C) from 32 to 64 bits? Are the variable length equals?
Is the first time i have to program under 64 bits, i don't know if i have to learn something different or not!!
Thanks!!

[Steven Schweda · Accepted solution]

> Are the variable length equals?

Pointers aren't. If you have doubts, write a
small test program, build it (both ways), and
run the resulting executables. For example:

alp $ type siz.c
#include

main()
{
printf( " char = %d, int = %d, long = %d, long long = %d, void* = %d.\n",
sizeof( char), sizeof( int), sizeof( long),
sizeof( long long), sizeof( void *));
}


> But the same program show different results
> that under 32 bits.

Choose one problem and debug it. I would
expect you to learn more from that experience
than you will from any guesses I could make
without being able to see any of your code.

[Chanquete]

Hi Steven!
I have been reading info about 64 bits programming. I see the differences about 'long' and 'pointers' length. By the moment i will steel working under 32 bits, because i'm also migrating from PA-RISC to Itanium. When my programs works fine in Itanium (under 32 bits), i will study more about 64 bits programming and the changes i have to do in my source code. It are requeriments of my boss.
Surely i'll ask here another questions in a future.
Thanks so much!!

[Gweeper64]

Have you tried compiling your code in 32 bit mode on the Itanium (leave off the +DD64) to see if it is really a 64 bit issue vs some other platform difference?

[Gweeper64]

oops.... never mind. I see you are trying that.

[Dennis Handly]

>PA-RISC 32 bits to Integrity 64 bits.

There is no requirement to go to 64 bit. You should ask your boss why he thinks 64 bit is needed??

>Is the first time I have to program under 64 bits, I don't know if I have to learn something different or not!!

You have to port to 64 bit, i.e to do work and know what you are doing.
There are a +wlint +w64bit options to help you.

Have you seen the documentation under:
http://www.hp.com/go/cpp

HP-UX 64-bit porting and transition guide
http://h21007.www2.hp.com/portal/site/dspp/menuitem.863c3e4cbcdc3f3515b49c108973a801/?ciid=2308852bcbe02110852bcbe02110275d6e10RCRD

>Steven: build it (both ways) printf(" char = %d, ... sizeof(char),

This already violates 64 bit porting. The correct format on HP-UX is: %ld
Even more pedantically: %lu
Or C99 perfection on 11.31: %z

[Steven Schweda]

> This already violates 64 bit porting.

How? "sizeof" isn't an int? "%d" doesn't
work with an int?

Please point me to the docs which explain
this.

[Chanquete]

Hi people!
I don't know why my boss (above the customer) loves 64 bits... I don't mind it, i only have to do what they order me!
I'm seeing that i'll have problems in the treatment of 'long' and pointers. When i know something more about the world where i'm entering, i'll start to ask you over and over.
Thanks so much!!

[Dennis Handly]

>Steven: "sizeof" isn't an int?

No, sizeof is a size_t. On HP-UX that's a unsigned long.

>Please point me to the docs which explain this.

The C or C++ Standards?
http://docs.hp.com/en/B3901-90020/ch05s13.html

>I don't know why my boss (above the customer) loves 64 bits

It should be clear in his mind, at least enough to explain to you. Some valid reasons are:
1) Wants to port to Linux on Integrity.
2) Needs more address space because it is close to the 2 Gb limit.
3) Third party shlibs only come in 64 bit.

[Chanquete]

Hi people!
I have a doubt with my code.
I have a 'long field' variable, and on another side i get, via Oracle SQLDA structures, data from my DB. Look at this line:
--- field = *(long *)std_outp->V[0];
Really, it's a conversion from 'char **' to 'long'. It works perfectly under 32 bits. An example of my values at this point:
>>>>>>> std_outp->V[0] = '989999'
>>>>>>> field = 989999
But, compiled under 64 bits, it gives me:
>>>>>>> std_outp->V[0] = '989999'
>>>>>>> field = 4252013328072704
To do fine the 'cast', i have to type:
--- field = *(int *)std_outp->V[0];
I know the problem is in the length of pointers and 'long' under 64 bits. But i find this conversion, via 'int', something 'horrible', i think that there has to be another way more 'beautiful' to do the cast. Are there?
Thanks in advance!