On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 4:18 PM, H. Peter Anvin <h...@zytor.com> wrote: > On 05/07/2013 04:17 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> >> The one and only time I tried to use this, I thought this was odd. Long >> has a different size on 32 vs 64 bit architectures, and bit ops seem >> like they'd want to be the same size everywhere so you can allocate the >> appropriate number of bits. (Also, if you only want 32 bits, you have >> to do some evil cheating, and I don't trust casting int* to long* on >> big-endian architectures.) >> >> Would offering a u32* option make sense? >> > > Honestly, the only thing that makes sense on bigendian architectures is > either byte-by-byte elements or counting bit numbers from the MSB, but > that is serious water under the bridge at this point...
Sure... but would some important data structure that only need 32 bits get shorter if there were 32-bit bitops? --Andy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
