On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Greg Stein <gstein_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 16:48, Hyrum K Wright <hyrum.wright_at_wandisco.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Greg Stein <gstein_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 16:15, <hwright_at_apache.org> wrote:
>>>> Author: hwright
>>>> Date: Thu Apr 5 20:15:41 2012
>>>> New Revision: 1310047
>>>>
>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1310047&view=rev
>>>> Log:
>>>> * subversion/libsvn_ra/compat.c
>>>> (prev_log_path): Another integer-width mismatch fix.
>>>>
>>>> Modified:
>>>> subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_ra/compat.c
>>>>
>>>> Modified: subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_ra/compat.c
>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_ra/compat.c?rev=1310047&r1=1310046&r2=1310047&view=diff
>>>> ==============================================================================
>>>> --- subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_ra/compat.c (original)
>>>> +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_ra/compat.c Thu Apr 5 20:15:41 2012
>>>> @@ -141,7 +141,7 @@ prev_log_path(const char **prev_path_p,
>>>> svn_sort__item_t item = APR_ARRAY_IDX(paths,
>>>> i - 1, svn_sort__item_t);
>>>> const char *ch_path = item.key;
>>>> - int len = strlen(ch_path);
>>>> + size_t len = strlen(ch_path);
>>>
>>> size_t or should this be apr_size_t?
>>
>> You ask this question *every time* one of these changes is made. :P
>>
>> And the response usually is "apr_size_t is a typedef of size_t on
>> every platform we support, and we already use a mix of the two
>> throughout our code".
>
> I count about 100 size_t usages, and over 1200 apr_size_t. I think the
> vote is for the latter :-P
I went with 'size_t' in this case since the value is the result of a
call to strlen(), a standard library function defined to return
size_t. In cases where we interact with APR, I usually favor
apr_size_t, since that's what the APIs ask for / require. I suspect
others follow this same pattern.
> Personally, I don't care much either way except for consistency. And
> so when I see a bare size_t, then I ask. I think the tendency should
> be for apr_size_t unless there is some specific reason otherwise.
I've no objection to standardization; I just don't care enough to be
the one to do it. :)
-Hyrum
--
uberSVN: Apache Subversion Made Easy
http://www.uberSVN.com/
Received on 2012-04-05 23:58:04 CEST