Bug 2531 - ETCL_Constraint misbehaves with CORBA::ULongLong and CORBA::LongLong
Summary: ETCL_Constraint misbehaves with CORBA::ULongLong and CORBA::LongLong
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: TAO
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Notification Service (show other bugs)
Version: 1.5.1
Hardware: All All
: P3 normal
Assignee: Lothar Werzinger
URL:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2006-05-08 19:30 CDT by Lothar Werzinger
Modified: 2008-03-28 16:11 CDT (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Lothar Werzinger 2006-05-08 19:30:48 CDT 
ETCL_Constraint misbehaves with CORBA::ULongLong and CORBA::LongLong

in TAO_ETCL_Literal_Constraint::comparable_type of ETCL_Constraint 
CORBA::ULongLong and CORBA::LongLong are mapped to TAO_ETCL_UNSIGNED and 
TAO_ETCL_SIGNED, but the code in 
TAO_ETCL_Literal_Constraint::TAO_ETCL_Literal_Constraint (CORBA::Any * any) 
only extracts short and long, but no longLong. It also has only a (u)long 
storage defined in ETCL_Constraint.h
Comment 1 Douglas C. Schmidt 2006-05-08 19:41:12 CDT 
Hi Lothar, thanks for the bug report.  This problem is unlikely to be fixed 
unless you volunteer to fix it and/or contact one of the commercial support 
companies!  thanks,  Doug
Comment 2 Johnny Willemsen 2006-05-22 08:39:19 CDT 
to the generic pool
Comment 3 Johnny Willemsen 2006-06-01 05:40:21 CDT 
just accept for generic pool, no idea when someone has time for this.
Comment 4 Johnny Willemsen 2008-03-28 05:09:24 CDT 
to Lothar, do you have patches/tests for this?
Comment 5 Lothar Werzinger 2008-03-28 16:11:08 CDT 
No I don't. But it is pretty obvious that a 32bit variable won't be able to hold a 64 bit value.