On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 16:48, Hyrum K Wright <hyrum.wri...@wandisco.com> > wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 16:15, <hwri...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> Author: hwright >>>> Date: Thu Apr 5 20:15:41 2012 >>>> New Revision: 1310047 >>>> >>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1310047&view=rev >>>> Log: >>>> * subversion/libsvn_ra/compat.c >>>> (prev_log_path): Another integer-width mismatch fix. >>>> >>>> Modified: >>>> subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_ra/compat.c >>>> >>>> Modified: subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_ra/compat.c >>>> URL: >>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_ra/compat.c?rev=1310047&r1=1310046&r2=1310047&view=diff >>>> ============================================================================== >>>> --- subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_ra/compat.c (original) >>>> +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_ra/compat.c Thu Apr 5 20:15:41 2012 >>>> @@ -141,7 +141,7 @@ prev_log_path(const char **prev_path_p, >>>> svn_sort__item_t item = APR_ARRAY_IDX(paths, >>>> i - 1, >>>> svn_sort__item_t); >>>> const char *ch_path = item.key; >>>> - int len = strlen(ch_path); >>>> + size_t len = strlen(ch_path); >>> >>> size_t or should this be apr_size_t? >> >> You ask this question *every time* one of these changes is made. :P >> >> And the response usually is "apr_size_t is a typedef of size_t on >> every platform we support, and we already use a mix of the two >> throughout our code". > > I count about 100 size_t usages, and over 1200 apr_size_t. I think the > vote is for the latter :-P
I went with 'size_t' in this case since the value is the result of a call to strlen(), a standard library function defined to return size_t. In cases where we interact with APR, I usually favor apr_size_t, since that's what the APIs ask for / require. I suspect others follow this same pattern. > Personally, I don't care much either way except for consistency. And > so when I see a bare size_t, then I ask. I think the tendency should > be for apr_size_t unless there is some specific reason otherwise. I've no objection to standardization; I just don't care enough to be the one to do it. :) -Hyrum -- uberSVN: Apache Subversion Made Easy http://www.uberSVN.com/
