Carl Witty wrote: > On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Robert Bradshaw <SNIP>
>> I think "int" is the best thing to return--it can always get coerced >> up to a size_t if needed, but the other way may prove problematic. >> Also, "int" is a more abstract (conceptually at least) type (better >> fitting with the ambiguity in the C standard), and we shouldn't have >> to worry about overflow in this case. > > Certainly the result of sizeof can overflow an int. (Presumably on > 64-bit Windows, it can overflow unsigned long, as well.) > > Or are you saying that we don't have to worry about it because people > won't define such large types? That may be true in practice, but it > makes me uncomfortable. +1 There *is* actually code in the Sage library that has overflow potential on 64 bit Windows and it needs to be fixed. Debugging some strange segfault caused by the above is hard enough at it is, adding platform specific issues doesn't make it any better. The C and C++ people did define size_t for a reason since all those assumptions about int or long being "big enough" does not hold true in the real world, so let's do this by the book. > Carl Cheers, Michael > _______________________________________________ > Cython-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev > _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
