Florian Weimer wrote:
Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
I recommend defining your own equivalents to off_t & ino_t (if needed) which are *always* 64 bits wide. Only your library implementation uses the system off_t & ino_t definitions and they are not used in your public library headers. This way your library has a consistent interface and the dependent application can use it regardless of whether or not it is built to support large files.
Well, that doesn't work that well if you are writing a C++ POSIX binding and don't want to duplicate those data structures. But I see you point. Maybe I should make the affected functions artificially templated, this would get things right.
How do win32 c++ headers deal with shapeshifting types?
cheers, -- guido http://AC-Archive.sf.net/largefile GCS/E/S/P C++/++++$ ULHS L++w- N++@ s+:a d(+-) r+@>+++ y++ 5++X- (geekcode)
