Paul Eggert <egg...@cs.ucla.edu> writes: > -extern void base64_encode (const char *restrict in, size_t inlen, > - char *restrict out, size_t outlen); > +extern void base64_encode (const char *restrict in, idx_t inlen, > + char *restrict out, idx_t outlen);
Thanks for improving the code -- however, the API is quite wide spread already, and size_t (or unsigned int) is widely used for many other base64 APIs so this change causes friction at the API level. What do you think? I'm not sure I understand why idx_t is better than size_t here, can you elaborate? Why not ssize_t? Maybe a compromise is to keep the old API but add new APIs with idx_t types and the implementation of the old functions uses the new one. /Simon
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
