Re: size_t vs "unsigned long"

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Kyle Moffett
Date: Thursday, October 4, 2007 - 11:27 pm

On Oct 03, 2007, at 17:36:03, Florian Weimer wrote:

For reference, Linux is always an LP32 (long-and-pointer-are-32-bit)  
or LP64 (long-and-pointer-are-64-bit) platform.  On the other hand,  
for crappy backwards-compat reasons, Windows is either LP32 or LLP64  
(long-long-and-pointer-are-64-bit).  I think most of the remaining  
UNIXes fall into the LP32/LP64 category, the LLP64 platforms are  
fairly rare (thankfully).

Cheers,
Kyle Moffett

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
size_t vs "unsigned long", Junio C Hamano, (Wed Oct 3, 1:30 pm)
Re: size_t vs "unsigned long", Pierre Habouzit, (Wed Oct 3, 1:48 pm)
Re: size_t vs "unsigned long", Junio C Hamano, (Wed Oct 3, 2:05 pm)
Re: size_t vs "unsigned long", Jan Wielemaker, (Wed Oct 3, 2:19 pm)
Re: size_t vs "unsigned long", Pierre Habouzit, (Wed Oct 3, 2:36 pm)
Re: size_t vs "unsigned long", Florian Weimer, (Wed Oct 3, 2:36 pm)
Re: size_t vs "unsigned long", Jan Wielemaker, (Thu Oct 4, 12:16 am)
Re: size_t vs "unsigned long", Kyle Moffett, (Thu Oct 4, 11:27 pm)