cvs commit: src/sys/security/audit audit_arg.c

[Dag-Erling Smørgrav]

Max Laier <max at love2party.net> writes:
> As this is somewhat vendor code, I think u_int64_t is okay.

On the contrary; u_int*_t is an old BSDism (which we accept for
historical reasons), while uint64_t is the correct C99 syntax.

> As for %ju, I think it's stupid.  I even believe that %llu shouldn't
> raise an error when printing unsigned integers with sizeof(arg_type)
> == sizeof(long long) - this should be possible as a compile time
> assert in whatever code is responsible for this.

The C Standard respectfully disagrees.

> We are seeing this type of porting problem over and over again,
> there should be a better sollution.

There is in C99: printf("%" PRIu64 "\n", foo);

DES
-- 
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - des at des.no