Max Laier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> As this is somewhat vendor code, I think u_int64_t is okay.
On the contrary; u_int*_t is an old BSDism (which we accept for
historical reasons), while uint64_t is the correct C99 syntax.
> As for %ju, I think it's stupid. I even believe that %llu shouldn't
> raise an error when printing unsigned integers with sizeof(arg_type)
> == sizeof(long long) - this should be possible as a compile time
> assert in whatever code is responsible for this.
The C Standard respectfully disagrees.
> We are seeing this type of porting problem over and over again,
> there should be a better sollution.
There is in C99: printf("%" PRIu64 "\n", foo);
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
