On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 06:12:59PM -0700, Isaac Dunham wrote:
> I'm guessing that the attached patch would be the most corrrect approach;
> any comments?
Applied,
> + if (!str || sscanf(str, "%lld", &sec) != 1)
Try compile with -Wformat, compiler does not like
%ll for int64_t types :-)
We usually use %jd and %ju for 64-bit numbers, but real pedantic
solution is to use SCN macros ("%"SCNi64 in this case) from
inttypes.h.
Hmm.. is there any system where intmax_t is already 128-bits? I know
that gcc already supports __int128_t on some archs, but it's not
treated as extended integer types. So, I guess we're relative safe
when we assume that intmax_t is 64-bits :-)
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/29927562/what-abi-if-any-restricts-the-size-of-uintmax-t
Karel
--
Karel Zak <kzak@xxxxxxxxxx>
http://karelzak.blogspot.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
