Daniel Stenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, 10 May 2004, [iso-8859-2] Dra?en Ka?ar wrote: > >> > * Change most (all?) occurrences of `long' in the code to `off_t'. Or >> > should we go the next logical step and just use uintmax_t right >> > away? >> >> Just use off_t. > > ... but Windows has no off_t... ;-)
That in itself is not a problem because, under Windows, off_t will be typedeffed to a 64-bit type if LFS is available, and to `int' otherwise. The point of my question was: should low-level code even care whether LFS is in use (by using off_t for various variables), or should it use intmax_t to get the largest representation available on the system? The latter is in principle sort of like using `long', except you're not tied to the actual size of `long'.
