Re: size_t vs "unsigned long"

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Pierre Habouzit <madcoder@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

>   Well, afaict, on every linux archs I know of, unsigned longs and
> size_t are the same. Though, I don't know if that holds for the msys
> port, and if that does not holds, then a s/unsigned long/size_t/ would
> help them. Else, for consistency sake, I believe the change is a good
> one.

FWIW, I am already getting bitten on a FC box with gcc 4.1.1
20060525 that warns about the wrong type being passed, as I
usually build things with -Werror; the issue is not just "they
are of the same underlying type".

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux