CC'ing [EMAIL PROTECTED] since the code in question is in APR. On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 05:45:53PM +0100, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote: > > On Feb 22, 2008, at 9:27 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, VF-Group wrote: > > > + /* > > > + * Try to reduce the following casting mess: We know that point will > > > be > > > + * larger equal 0 now and forever and thus that point (apr_off_t) and > > > + * apr_size_t will fit into apr_uint64_t in any case. > > > + */ > > > > Do we really know that? Is that confirmed at configure > > time? > > Do we have any integer on any platform that we support that is larger > as apr_uint64_t / apr_int64_t? > I always thought that they are the largest and that on no platform > we have any integers with more than 64 bit.
APR doesn't support any platform where sizeof(apr_off_t) > 8, that is correct. joe
