Re: [vpp-dev] u32 vs uint32_t

Cc: vpp-dev Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] u32 vs uint32_t +1. I’ll patch the uses of uin32_t. /neale From: mailto:vpp-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io>> on behalf of "Dave Barach (dbarach)" mailto:dbar...@cisco.com>> Date: Monday, 11 September 2017 at 18:59 To: Dave Wallace mailt

Re: [vpp-dev] u32 vs uint32_t

+1. I’ll patch the uses of uin32_t. /neale From: on behalf of "Dave Barach (dbarach)" Date: Monday, 11 September 2017 at 18:59 To: Dave Wallace , Florin Coras , "Luke, Chris" Cc: vpp-dev Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] u32 vs uint32_t +1, let’s stick with u32... Thanks… Dave

Re: [vpp-dev] u32 vs uint32_t

+1, let’s stick with u32... Thanks… Dave From: vpp-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io [mailto:vpp-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io] On Behalf Of Dave Wallace Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 12:36 PM To: Florin Coras ; Luke, Chris Cc: vpp-dev Subject: Re: [vpp-dev] u32 vs uint32_t +1 On 09/11/2017 11:27 AM

Re: [vpp-dev] u32 vs uint32_t

+1 On 09/11/2017 11:27 AM, Florin Coras wrote: Hi Chris, Personally, I’d like to enforce the use of u32. Is it an option to just replace all occurrences of uint32_t in ip.h/mpls.h? Thanks, Florin On Sep 11, 2017, at 7:55 AM, Luke, Chris > wrote: For discussi

Re: [vpp-dev] u32 vs uint32_t

Hi Chris, Personally, I’d like to enforce the use of u32. Is it an option to just replace all occurrences of uint32_t in ip.h/mpls.h? Thanks, Florin > On Sep 11, 2017, at 7:55 AM, Luke, Chris wrote: > > For discussion: VPP has traditionally used its own fixed-width types, such as > u32 and

[vpp-dev] u32 vs uint32_t

For discussion: VPP has traditionally used its own fixed-width types, such as u32 and u64 and only uses standard types when referring to the external world (eg, to talk to libc, etc). Recently I've noticed the C99 variant, uint32_t creeping in more and into VPP internal matters. As a matter of s