Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] Upcast size_t variables to uintmax_t when printing

On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 11:16:50AM +0100, Torsten Bögershausen wrote: > > I like the overall direction. I feel a little funny doing this step now, > > and not as part of a series to convert individual variables. But I > > cannot offhand think of any reason that it would behave badly even if > >

Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] Upcast size_t variables to uintmax_t when printing

On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 02:28:35AM -0500, Jeff King wrote: > On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 08:05:04AM +0100, tbo...@web.de wrote: > > > From: Torsten Bögershausen > > > > When printing variables which contain a size, today "unsigned long" > > is used at many places. > > In order to be able to change

Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] Upcast size_t variables to uintmax_t when printing

On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 08:05:04AM +0100, tbo...@web.de wrote: > From: Torsten Bögershausen > > When printing variables which contain a size, today "unsigned long" > is used at many places. > In order to be able to change the type from "unsigned long" into size_t > some day in the future, we

[PATCH v2 1/1] Upcast size_t variables to uintmax_t when printing

From: Torsten Bögershausen When printing variables which contain a size, today "unsigned long" is used at many places. In order to be able to change the type from "unsigned long" into size_t some day in the future, we need to have a way to print 64 bit variables on a system that has "unsigned