Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:21:48 -0500 From: Mike Barcroft <mike@freebsd.org> To: David Malone <dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie> Cc: audit@freebsd.org, markm@freebsd.org, Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> Subject: Re: Warns for tcopy and wc. Message-ID: <20011204112148.F57237@espresso.q9media.com> In-Reply-To: <200112041341.aa05762@salmon.maths.tcd.ie>; from dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie on Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 01:41:07PM %2B0000 References: <20011203215452.E57237@espresso.q9media.com> <200112041341.aa05762@salmon.maths.tcd.ie>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
David Malone <dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie> writes: > I presume casting to intmax_t will be the oficially blessed way of > printing typedefed things now? If so we should make gcc's format > warning code understand the %j modifier - maybe I should look into > that (or maybe some of the FreeBSD standards people are doing that?). Yes, intmax_t is guaranteed to be capable of representing any value of any signed integer. Similarly, uintmax_t is guaranteed to be capable of representing any value of any unsigned integer. It would probably be a good idea to teach GCC about these types. > Is it apropriate to use intmax_t where you want to count something > big? For example, would it be OK to change wc and tcopy to use > intmax_t instead of the int64_t and quad_t which they currently > use? That seems like a reasonable use to me. Best regards, Mike Barcroft To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-audit" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011204112148.F57237>