lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Apr]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Use of C99 int types
Herbert Xu wrote:

>Dag Arne Osvik <da@osvik.no> wrote:
>
>
>>>... and with such name 99% will assume (at least at the first reading)
>>>that it _is_ 32bits. We have more than enough portability bugs as it
>>>is, no need to invite more by bad names.
>>>
>>>
>>Agreed. The way I see it there are two reasonable options. One is to
>>just use u32, which is always correct but sacrifices speed (at least
>>with the current gcc). The other is to introduce C99 types, which Linus
>>doesn't seem to object to when they are kept away from interfaces
>>(http://infocenter.guardiandigital.com/archive/linux-kernel/2004/Dec/0117.html).
>>
>>
>
>There is a third option which has already been pointed out before:
>
>Use unsigned long.
>
>

Yes, as Kulewski pointed out, unsigned long is at least 32 bits wide and
therefore correct. Whether it's also fastest is less of a concern, but
it is so for at least the x86* architectures. So, sure, I'll use it.

Cheers all,

--
Dag Arne

-
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: 2005-04-06 13:31    [W:0.491 / U:1.036 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site