On 05/15/2017 10:56 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 10:54:03AM +0200, Michal Privoznik wrote: > >> Now, question is whether we want signed or unsigned long long. I don't >> have an opinion about that. On one hand, off_t is signed, but that's >> because lseek() can seek backwards. We don't have that in our streams. >> Yet. On the other hand, our streams are different to regular files. I >> view them as a unidirectional pipe. With some extensions (e.g. sparse >> messages). lseek() doesn't work over pipes, does it. But then again, >> long long might be more future proof, if we will ever want to assign a >> meaning to negative seeks. > > I guess we might as well use signed long long - we aren't gaining anything > by using unsigned long long, since the value will be truncated to signed > long long when we use it with lseek(). Good point. I'll go with signed long long then. Michal -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
