On 5/30/24 14:59, enh wrote: >> *shrug* Removing all uses of mode_t and using "unsigned" instead consistently >> should work fine. Only "struct stat" should really care, and even then they >> could just use the actual primitive type in the struct definition... >> >> (I'm not a fan of data hiding without some _reason_ for it. I used to humor >> it a lot more, but now I want to know what/why it's doing.) > > funnily enough, i'm having exactly this argument with the person who > asked for this chmod functionality, since they own the ABI checker, > and i'm claiming that telling me that i've "changed" u_int32_t to > uint32_t is not helpful, and that when talking about ABI i always want > the underlying type :-)
LP64 remains a good idea. Pity the ANSI C committee for C89 didn't have a spine. (Yeah they had to navigate the 16->32 bit transition, but LP32 for 32-bit ANSI C systems would have made OBVIOUS SENSE. "There are older systems that aren't LP32" was a given. The 68k came out in 1980 and the 386 in 1985, they weren't exactly taken by surprise by 32 bit registers and a flat memory model...) Rob _______________________________________________ Toybox mailing list Toybox@lists.landley.net http://lists.landley.net/listinfo.cgi/toybox-landley.net