possible typo in validity.cpp

[krick]

In the recent commit to validity.cpp, I think there might be a typo in the first line in this function...

Code: Select all

void validity_checker::validate_inlines()
{
	volatile UINT64 testu64a = random_i64();
	volatile INT64 testi64a = random_i64();
	volatile UINT32 testu32a = random_u32();
	volatile UINT32 testu32b = random_u32();
	volatile INT32 testi32a = random_i32();
	volatile INT32 testi32b = random_i32();	
	...

Since the type is UINT64, shouldn't the method called be: random_u64()
The other initializations match their types, that's the only odd one.

[Tafoid]

In the recent commit to validity.cpp, I think there might be a typo in the first line in this function...

Code: Select all

void validity_checker::validate_inlines()
{
	volatile UINT64 testu64a = random_i64();
	volatile INT64 testi64a = random_i64();
	volatile UINT32 testu32a = random_u32();
	volatile UINT32 testu32b = random_u32();
	volatile INT32 testi32a = random_i32();
	volatile INT32 testi32b = random_i32();	
	...

Since the type is UINT64, shouldn't the method called be: random_u64()
The other initializations match their types, that's the only odd one.

This appears fixed in current GIT: https://github.com/mamedev/mame/commit/ ... 807e7cb5bc
I'd suggest using the GIT Issues to point out such bleeding edge problems or join us in IRC (freenode - #mame) for more immediate attention in the future as the forum at this time hasn't a whole lot of attention yet.