Devin Reade writes: > They should at least be as portable as the ato* functions, unless > perhaps someone is still using a K&R C compiler somewhere, which > I doubt. If there's any portability issue, I would expect it to > rear its head more for the 'long long' versions of both rather than > ato* vs strto*. >
I've checked the repository. Obviously atoll() was missing from MinGW (for the more or less native Windows port of libdbi). Does anyone happen to know if MinGW still lacks atoll()/strtoll() support these days? In any case, we stole an atoll() implementation from MySQL back then, which upon close inspection also turns out to be implemented via its own strtoll(). Therefore switching from ato*() to strto*() should not hurt. > That being said, the only real test is empirical. > True indeed. I'll look into this. regards, Markus -- Markus Hoenicka http://www.mhoenicka.de AQ score 38 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Verizon Developer Community Take advantage of Verizon's best-in-class app development support A streamlined, 14 day to market process makes app distribution fast and easy Join now and get one step closer to millions of Verizon customers http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-dev2dev _______________________________________________ libdbi-users mailing list libdbi-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libdbi-users
