On Fri, Sep 02, 2016 at 05:13:48PM -0400, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 06:26:49PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 09/08/2016 18:24, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > >>> > > -static inline TraceEventID trace_event_get_id(TraceEvent *ev)
> > >>> > > +static inline size_t trace_event_get_id(TraceEvent *ev)
> > >>> > > {
> > >>> > > assert(ev != NULL);
> > >>> > > return ev->id;
> > >> >
> > >> > Perhaps "unsigned" is a better match than size_t?
> > > I don't mind either way - I just happen to personally always use size_t
> > > for anything that ends up being used primarily as an array index.
> >
> > Makes sense. I was thinking of simpletrace's 32-bit id instead.
>
> I think unsigned is slightly clearer since it expresses the intent that
> the values are limited to 32 bits.
I'll switch to 'uint32_t' since that unambigously matches that
simpletrace mandates.
Regards,
Daniel
--
|: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|
