lvqcl wrote: > > Ah, missed that because it was MSVC code. They should be `uint64_t`. > > No, sizeof(unsigned long) is always 4 on Windows. > See http://www.viva64.com/en/t/0012/
Bah! Trust Windows to be different :). > >> According to MSDN _BitScanReverse*() functions have signatures: > >> unsigned char _BitScanReverse(unsigned long *, unsigned long); > >> unsigned char _BitScanReverse64(unsigned long *, unsigned __int64); > > > > The `unsigned long` type should be synonymous with `uint64_t` so using > > `uint64_t` should be safe. Furthermore if they aren't synonymous we > > *want* that to be a compile error! > > It's synonymous to uint32_t, but if the 1st parameter for > _BitScanReverse*() > functions has 'pointer to unsigned long' type then IMHO it's better to > simply use unsigned long variable there. Sorry, I disagree on the idea of using `unsigned long` exactly because anyone that comes from Unix will assume that is `uint64_t`. Better to use `uint32_t` which is totally platform independant and unambiguous. Erik -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Erik de Castro Lopo http://www.mega-nerd.com/ _______________________________________________ flac-dev mailing list flac-dev@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac-dev
