On 09/10/15 15:56, Michael McConville wrote:
Because that's what the original define used, so the compiled code would be the same.Martijn van Duren wrote:I already sent this diff on September 1st.[1] Pointed out in private to and ok by nicm@[1]http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=144112883814618&w=2Ah, awkward. I hadn't seen this. Can you clarify why you used int instead of int32_t?
