On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 01:05:55PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: > On 09/27/2012 10:44 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > From: "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > The __LINE__ macro value is specified to fit in the size_t > > Not quite accurate. C99 merely says: > > 6.10.4 p3: > ... a line number as specified by the digit sequence (interpreted as > a decimal integer). The digit sequence shall not specify zero, nor a > number greater than > 2147483647. > > 6.10.8 p1: > _ _LINE_ _ The presumed line number (within the current source file) of > the current > source line (an integer constant). > > So in fact, __LINE__ is guaranteed to fit within a 32-bit signed > integer, and you could s/size_t/int/ with no loss in functionality since > we don't port to 16-bit 'int' platforms. That said, I'm not too fussed > with things; size_t is definitely better than 'long long', so I'm okay > even if you don't further relax to 'int'. Based on discussion in the later patches, I'm happy to change this to just 'int'. Still surprised it wasn't actually size_t in the standard, but oh well. Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list