[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [cp-patches] RFC: checking for socklen_t

From: Dalibor Topic
Subject: Re: [cp-patches] RFC: checking for socklen_t
Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 09:24:41 -0800
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.28i

On Mon, Jan 02, 2006 at 03:24:38PM +0100, Andreas Tobler wrote:
> Christian Thalinger wrote:
> >On Sun, 2006-01-01 at 23:42 +0100, Andreas Tobler wrote:
> >>Well, he hasn't yet, but I'll add my comment here.
> >>
> >>I'd like to see it as an unsigned int and not an int. Most systems I 
> >>know use unsigned int for socklen_t. Posix.1g also recommends to use 
> >>uint32_t for socklen_t.
> >
> >Well, on this very special OS not even uint32_t is defined.  So i'd vote
> >for `unsigned int' if you think we should use unsigned.
> That's fine with me. uint32_t is more or less 'unsigned int'.

I'll try to wrap up a patch from Kaffe today that uses
AX_CREATE_STDINT.m4 from ac-acrhive from Guido Draheim to declare
those nice C99 types on compilers lacking them. It has served us well in
Kaffe. :)

That should make uint32_t available to any classpath code including the
respective wrapper header.

dalibor topic

> Thanks,
> Andreas
> _______________________________________________
> Classpath-patches mailing list
> address@hidden

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]