On Wed, 19 Mar 2003, Robert Collins wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-03-19 at 21:15, Thomas Pfaff wrote: > > > > > > Secondly, IIRC lock_counter should be long, so the (long *) typecasting > > > > > isn't needed. > > > > > > > > IMHO it should be unsigned since it makes no sense to have negative > > > > counter values. In practice it doesn't make any difference because there > > > > are not greater or smaller equations in the code. > > > > > > It's about type safety. Please, correct it. > > > > Why not create an InterlockedIncrement|Decrement that takes unsigned long > > arguments instead ? This has nothing to do with type safety but with lack > > of functions. > > * make unsigned variants of the interlockedIncrement|Decrement that will > throw (not C++, rather a processor exception) overflow or underflow as > appropriate. ??? I do not think that this required and i do not think that a processor exception will be thrown if you have longs. Anyway, if you insists in it i will change the type to long but i still disagree Thomas
