[Vm-dev] Integer overflow with BitBlt rule 20 and depth 32

Juan Vuletich juan at jvuletich.org
Fri Oct 30 13:17:55 UTC 2009

Henrik Johansen wrote:
> Not that it matters on 32bit architecture, but don't you in theory 
> have to use unsigned long to ensure an integer of at least 32 bits is 
> used?

Squeak was never meant to run in 16 bit hardware. I believe that 
attempts to generalize the assumption of 32bit in BitBlt (and many other 
places) should focus on 64 bit. Not a current concern of mine, though.

> Other than that I see no problems, until someone decides to add depths 
> > 32. (And then you'd have to modify the methods anyways).

Supporting depths of more than 32 bit would require a lot more than 
modifying this few methods!

> Cheers,
> Henry

Thanks for reviewing!

Juan Vuletich

More information about the Vm-dev mailing list