On Sat, 4 Feb 2006, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
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.
The vendor in this case is/uses an old BSD (Darwin). Which isn't to say it
shouldn't be updated, but is actually the case. Recent Darwin releases
properly support the newer type names, but older versions don't. Since we're
primarily interested in compatibility with recent Darwin, it makes sense to
update once we've finished the merge.
Robert N M Watson
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
