lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Jul]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 0xdeadbeef vs 0xdeadbeefL
--- Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 07, 2004 at 11:41:50AM -0700, tom st denis wrote:
> > Um, actually "char" like "int" and "long" in C99 is signed. So
> while
> > you can write
> >
> > signed int x = -3;
> >
> > You don't have to. in fact if you "have" to then your compiler is
> > broken. Now I know that GCC offers "unsigned chars" but that's an
> > EXTENSION not part of the actual standard.
>
> ------------------------------ snip -----------------------------
> [#15] The three types char, signed char, and unsigned char
> are collectively called the character types. The
> implementation shall define char to have the same range,
> representation, and behavior as either signed char or
> unsigned char.35)
> ------------------------------ snip -----------------------------

Right. Didn't know that. Whoa. So in essence "char" is not a safe
type.

> > As for writing portable code, um, jacka#!, BitKeeper, you know,
> that
> > thingy that hosts the Linux kernel? Yeah it uses LibTomCrypt. Why
> not
> > goto http://libtomcrypt.org and find out who the author is. Oh
> yeah,
> > that would be me. Why not email Wayne Scott [who has code in
> > LibTomCrypt btw...] and ask him about it?
> >
> > Who elses uses LibTomCrypt? Oh yeah, Sony, Gracenote, IBM [um Joy
> > Latten can chip in about that], Intel, various schools including
> > Harvard, Stanford, MIT, BYU, ...
>
> Tons of people use windows aswell. You just showed that you don't
> know
> C well enough, so maybe someone should better do an audit for your
> code ;-)

To be honest I didn't know that above. That's why I'm always explicit.
[btw my code builds in MSVC, BCC and ICC as well].

You don't need to know such details to be able to develop in C. I'm
sure if you walked into [say] Redhat and gave an "on the spot C quiz"
about obscure rules they would fail. You have to use some common sense
and apply the more relevant rules.

Point is 0xDEADBEEFUL is just as simple to type and avoids any sort of
ambiguitity. It means unsigned long. No question about it. No having
to refer to subsection 12 of paragraph 15 of section 23 of chapter 9 to
figure that out.

Why people are fighting over this is beyond me. Fine, write it as
0xDEADBEEF see what the hell I care. Honestly. Open debate or what?

And I don't need mr. Viro coming down off his mountain saying "oh you
fail it" because I don't know some obscure typing rule that I wouldn't
come accross because *** I AM NOT LAZY ***. Hey mr. Viro what have you
contributed to the public domain lately? Anything I can harp on in
public and abuse?

Asshat.

Tom



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:04    [W:0.784 / U:0.332 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site