On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 12:40:05AM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Mon, 25.11.13 15:20, Dave Reisner (dreis...@kemper.freedesktop.org) wrote: > > > uint64_t can be formatted correctly with %ju, rather than casting to > > unsigned and potentially losing accuracy. > > Oh, shouldn't we be careful with that? %j is for intmax_t. Which might > or might not be int64_t. Given that int128_t is already on the horizon > (newer gcc already support __int128 on 64bit machines...), I wouldn't be > surprised if intmax_t is growing to 128bit eventually.
How do you change sizeof(uintmax_t) without breaking ABI? > Format strings don't really have a nice way to print fixed-size > integers I fear... the only stuff that is correct is the "PRIu64" macro, > but that's fricking ugly... > > I think PRIu64 is still a better, more future-proof option than %j though... Assuming uintmax_t really does increase in size, no type promotion, and someone actually manages to conjure up a system with 4 billion interfaces... _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel