DS> I'd suggest that the first thing would be to make sure that we have
DS> suitable 32-bit types available - either defining new project-specific
DS> types, or pick on a "standard" one and make sure it's defined
RS> I'd vote for the <inttypes.h>/<stdint.h> style (more C99 headers).
RS> I'd like to avoid project specific types...
OK - so what would that mean in practise?
What should the typedef name be for:
a) unsigned 32-bit integers
b) signed 32-bit integers
c) unsigned 64-bit integers
d) signed 64-bit integers
DS> That's probably something that could go in for 5.2,
DS> which would then provide the groundwork for starting to make use of it
DS> in later releases.
RS> Should we change/define one variable somewhere in snmplib to use it,
RS> to catch platforms where it isn't defined?
Hmmm....
That sounds a good idea, but I'm not sure 5.2 is the right place to do this.
*Maybe* for the (early) 5.2 pre-release cycle, but certainly not for 5.2
itself.
I'd feel happier putting the basic structure in place, but leaving the
"deliberately broken" testing for CVS-based code. I know that means
we won't catch problems as quickly, but I get enough mail as it is!
Dave
-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by Shop4tech.com-Lowest price on Blank Media
100pk Sonic DVD-R 4x for only $29 -100pk Sonic DVD+R for only $33
Save 50% off Retail on Ink & Toner - Free Shipping and Free Gift.
http://www.shop4tech.com/z/Inkjet_Cartridges/9_108_r285
_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-coders mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
