Sign in to follow this  

AngelScript 2.26.2

Recommended Posts

It appears that character literals are now treated as signed (most likely per rev 1600), but scriptstdstring addon's index operators still use uint8. This forces a rather awkward syntax needed for working with literals of high ASCII codes without getting any warnings:

somestring[5] == uint8('?');

I think character literals should stay unsigned, but in any case their sign should match that of the addon.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, character literals are still unsigned. This was not changed when I changed integer numbers to be signed.


What settings do you have for the following engine properties?






What is the compiler warning you get? And for what expression do you get them?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed they are. I just realized that it is our preprocessor that converts the character literals into integers, as a normal step of preprocessing. We don't even have asEP_USE_CHARACTER_LITERALS enabled. Another false alarm!

Edited by TheAtom

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is an improved version of the good old preprocessor by Anthony Casteel (also known as Deyja), from sources dating back to 2005 or so. I was going to mention it in relation to the other topic:


It is built over version 0.5 of that preprocessor. I couldn't find any newer version (if it ever existed), in fact I can't seem to find the original sources whatsoever, anywhere. In addition to the features from 0.5, our version includes:

- multiline macros,

- recursive macro expansion,

- token concatenation with ## operator,

- evaluation of constant expressions (somewhat incomplete),

- additional features for #pragmas,

- minor things such as #warning and #error,

- incidentally, character literals are now converted to unsigned integers.


It is still independent from AngelScritpt and is platform-agnostic, and features a working line number translation between sources and the preprocessed file. And it is still pretty lightweight.


I have hopes to release (or should I say re-release) it soon, although that's not entirely up to me. And following that, discuss a possibility of including it in AngelScript sdk in some way (probably as an addon).

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this