----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/31237/#review73646 -----------------------------------------------------------
Ship it! The qestion this raises is why we need to extract size_t from options rather than one of the more explicit types, but given that we do this looks like a good appraoch to figure ot how to handle size_t. - Andrew Stitcher On Feb. 23, 2015, 3:54 p.m., Steve Huston wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/31237/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Feb. 23, 2015, 3:54 p.m.) > > > Review request for qpid, Andrew Stitcher, Justin Ross, and Robbie Gemmell. > > > Bugs: QPID-6312 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/QPID-6312 > > > Repository: qpid > > > Description > ------- > > I started with simply reimplementing a size_t native check under ASF license > and learned that wasn't the whole story for Qpid's needs. It requires a check > to see if size_t is distinct from the other int types in qpid/IntegerTypes.h. > This patch is the result and, I think, more reliable and fitted to our needs > than the previous mechanism. > > > Diffs > ----- > > trunk/qpid/cpp/CMakeModules/CheckSizeTNativeType.cmake 1661190 > trunk/qpid/cpp/CMakeModules/CheckSizetDistinct.cmake PRE-CREATION > trunk/qpid/cpp/src/CMakeLists.txt 1661190 > trunk/qpid/cpp/src/config.h.cmake 1661190 > trunk/qpid/cpp/src/qpid/Options.cpp 1661190 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/31237/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > cmake on AIX (where the result is 'yes') and Linux (where the result is 'no'). > If this patch is acceptable, I will request it be merged to 0.32 as well. > > > Thanks, > > Steve Huston > >
