Victoria Dye <vdye@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > I chose 'uint64_t' to mimic 'throughput_string()' [1], but the signed > 'off_t' is a better choice given its use in 'strbuf_humanise_bytes()'. > > On a related note, while writing this I made the (unsubstantiated) > assumption that 'off_t' would be a 64-bit int, even on 32-bit systems. Your > comment prompted me to confirm that assumption; while 'off_t' is not always > guaranteed to be an int64 by default [2], Git is compiled with '#define > _FILE_OFFSET_BITS 64' [3] so 'off_t' is equivalent to 'off64_t'. Offset into a single file can be smaller than the size of the whole disk, after all, so from that point of view, use of off_t in "humanise_bytes" API may be something we would want to fix eventually to reduce confusion. I do not particularly mind casting up to uint64, especially if that matches the code lifted from scalar. As long as our longer term plan is to update strbuf_humanise_bytes() to take the widest possible unsigned integer, what we do right now would not make that much of a difference. Thanks.
