Are you referring to ssize_t? If so, that's not a typo. It's the signed version of size_t. The * should be next to the void, though.
I thought you meant size_t, but glad to know that I wasn't totally wrong.
jmh530 via Digitalmars-d-announce Wed, 28 Sep 2016 07:57:36 -0700
Are you referring to ssize_t? If so, that's not a typo. It's the signed version of size_t. The * should be next to the void, though.
I thought you meant size_t, but glad to know that I wasn't totally wrong.