2018-02-23 10:56 GMT+01:00 Martin Storsjö <mar...@martin.st>:
> On Fri, 23 Feb 2018, Kai Tietz via Mingw-w64-public wrote:
>> Patch looks fine beside one nit.  The behavior above 4294967 seconds
>> seems to be pretty unexpected, isn't it?
> Well since the useconds_t parameter is a typedef for unsigned int, I
> wouldn't think that callers expect to be able to sleep that long anyway. So
> all possible input values (the values between 0 and UINT32_MAX) should work
> just fine when divided by 1000 and passed to Sleep, no?
> // Martin

True, as long as useconds_t is 32 bits wide

So patch is ok.

Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
Mingw-w64-public mailing list

Reply via email to