RE: [Xen-devel] size_t and printk and Xen

[Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> >> I'm no particular fan of size_t in hypervisor interfaces
> >> though. So, for
> >> example, switching xmalloc() interfaces to use unsigned int
> >> instead would be
> >> fine by me, and this would sidestep the issue perhaps?
> > 
> > I think C99 size_t may have compile-time type-checking uses so
> > I'd be hesitant to remove it entirely.
> 
> Can you give a concrete example of how it helps us to use it 
> within the
> xmalloc interfaces? As far as I'm aware it's not useful at 
> all, but I could
> certainly be wrong as this aspect of the C spec is not 
> something I've ever
> really investigated.

No, I can't.  IIRC it has something to do with portability to
unusual platforms.  Perhaps someone else with more knowledge
of C99 can comment on whether size_t is useful in Xen or we
should just avoid using it.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel