cvs commit: src UPDATING src/include fts.h src/lib/libc/gen Makefile.inc Symbol.map fts-compat.c fts-compat.h fts.3 fts.c src/sys/sys param.h

[David O'Brien]

On Sun, Jan 27, 2008 at 08:38:13AM +0300, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 26, 2008 at 08:33:34PM -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 26, 2008 at 05:09:41PM +0000, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> > >   o For things that should be at least 64 bits wide, use long long
> > >     and not int64_t, as the latter is an optional type.
> > 
> > I don't follow - int64_t is an ISO-C99 type, and we have it in FreeBSD.
> > Is this code expected to be taken from FreeBSD and used in some pre-C99
> > system?
> 
> C99 explicitly says that any intN_t is an optional type[0].  E.g.,
> a 96-bit system may choose not to provide int64_t if none of its
> basic C types is 64 bits wide.

I think this is a quite silly argument.

    $ find /usr/src/sys -name \*.[ch] -a -type f \
        | xargs grep int[0-9][0-9]_t | wc -l
    37026

I think that shows we can depend on int64_t existing and usable.

> fts(3) is a purely userland library which need not depend on a
> particular platform[1], so I did my best to avoid any assumptions like,
> `There will never be a 96-bit system around.'

This is FreeBSD - not a magazine on C programming, in which examples
should be usable on all platforms.  Given the use of intN_t in the
kernel, we already cannot boot on this future platform

Please don't un-C99 the system that folks have worked to update us to.

-- 
-- David  (obrien at FreeBSD.org)