On Jul 13 09:54, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Jul 13 10:24, Ozkan Sezer wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Kai Tietz <[email protected]> wrote: > > > The cause for that I was suggesting __32LONG is that name is more > > > unlikely to be mixed-up with a real type. > > > > > > > Yuck, nonetheless.. Maybe WINLONG32, making it similar to the WINBOOL > > thing? > > Just to be clear, I don't really care. However, it is a macro, it's not > a typedef. As such, it might be good idea to make it clearly distinct > from the usual uppercase Windows typedefs. As a macro it should start > with leading underscores anyway so as not to clutter the namespace. > If that's distinction enough, maybe something like > > __LONG32 > __WINLONG > __WINLONG32 > > Makes sense. Just pick your favorite. > > Apart from that, in contrast to Kai I would prefer to define the 32 bit > unsigned long equivalent as a macro as well. Instead of definitions like > > typedef unsigned __LONG32 ULONG; > > unsigned __LONG32 __RPC_API BSTR_UserSize(unsigned __LONG32 *,unsigned > __LONG32,BSTR *); > > I think that something like > > typedef __ULONG32 ULONG; > > __ULONG32 __RPC_API BSTR_UserSize(__ULONG32 *,__ULONG32,BSTR *); > > looks cleaner. > > But, either way, I go with what you decide.
Ping? Corinna ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Mingw-w64-public mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public
