🚀 go-pugleaf

In my previous post I said:

>I found a major bug in Lattice C 5.04 for the IBM host, which is supposed
>to be identical to the native version, but I guess not.  The bug:
>
>LONG value;
>
>switch (value) {
> case 0:
>  DoSomething();
>  break;
>case 0x100000000
> DoFoo();
> break;
>}
>
>whether value is 0 or 100000000, DoSomething() executes.  When I looked at
>a disassembly from OMD, it was clear that in the 2nd case, the code was
>checking for equality to 0!  I am going to call Lattice about this,
>and will post further afterwards.

Oops!  That 2nd case value should be 0x10000000 (instead of a 64 bit #!).
Somebody noted that technically a long constant should be followed by an
L, but since 32 bits is an integer in this compiler by default, it doesn't
require the L.  Also, when I found this bug, I was using system defined
constants.

I have since talked to Lattice and sent them the actual offending code.
They were very nice, but will no doubt try to charge $100 for the
upgrade with the fixed bug...  Interestingly I found 2 more minor bugs
today -- they have quit asking me for my serial number because I called
so much.

The other 2 bugs:
1) The built-in functions abs(), min(), and max() aren't protyped as built-
in functions in string.h.  You can do it yourself, so it isn't major.

2) The following code generates an argument type incorrect error:

void Foo(short);

short x,y;

Foo(x-y);