Date: Fri, 16 Jun 95 20:05:03 MDT From: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert) To: ache@astral.msk.su (=?KOI8-R?Q?=E1=CE=C4=D2=C5=CA_=FE=C5=D2=CE=CF=D7?= aka) Cc: hackers@freebsd.org, peter@haywire.DIALix.COM Subject: Re: penalty of using off_t for arithmatic with gcc's long Message-ID: <9506170205.AA14060@cs.weber.edu> In-Reply-To: <MUJlYule90@astral.msk.su> from "=?KOI8-R?Q?=E1=CE=C4=D2=C5=CA_=FE=C5=D2=CE=CF=D7?= aka" at Jun 17, 95 05:11:47 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> 1) I say nothing here about atomic off_t, I say about "long" type > of fseek argument, you can see it in any POSIX docs copy. I don't see explicitly definition of off_t as long in my stuff. > 2) In my POSIX specs (maybe I look at wrong place?) I don't read > that off_t must be atomic, it says "integral". You're quite right. "integral", not "atomic". As to the patches: I was under the impression that you had used longs everywhere, and not done the off_t casting you report. So never mind, they're probably correct (if not clean for file offsets above 2G). Terry Lambert terry@cs.weber.edu --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9506170205.AA14060>