On 12 September 2017 at 15:33, D. Hugh Redelmeier <[email protected]> wrote:
> I would think that uintN_t should be used in preference to u_intN_t > since the former is a standard part of C and the latter comes from > some Linux kernal internal convention (I think). > > See stdint.h(0P) > > Why do we use u_* so often? > > Probably because the code pre-dates C99 general availability. While we're now well past that, switching everything over is a PITA. I figure as long as new code isn't taking us backwards. > u_* may well make sense for kernel interfaces. It depends how they > are documented (huh!). > > u_* seems wrong for things in ietf_constants.h. > > _______________________________________________ > Swan-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.libreswan.org/mailman/listinfo/swan-dev >
_______________________________________________ Swan-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libreswan.org/mailman/listinfo/swan-dev
