From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed May 27 20:06:47 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: FreeBSD-Questions@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8022F1065670
	for <FreeBSD-Questions@freebsd.org>;
	Wed, 27 May 2009 20:06:47 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from dkelly@Grumpy.DynDNS.org)
Received: from smtp.knology.net (smtp.knology.net [24.214.63.101])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1717E8FC1E
	for <FreeBSD-Questions@freebsd.org>;
	Wed, 27 May 2009 20:06:46 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from dkelly@Grumpy.DynDNS.org)
Received: (qmail 1774 invoked by uid 0); 27 May 2009 20:06:45 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO Grumpy.DynDNS.org) (24.42.224.110)
	by smtp7.knology.net with SMTP; 27 May 2009 20:06:45 -0000
Received: by Grumpy.DynDNS.org (Postfix, from userid 928)
	id 0789228435; Wed, 27 May 2009 15:06:45 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 15:06:45 -0500
From: David Kelly <dkelly@hiwaay.net>
To: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
Message-ID: <20090527200645.GA11584@Grumpy.DynDNS.org>
References: <4A1AA3DC.5020300@network-i.net>
	<200905271048.27837.kirk@strauser.com>
	<alpine.BSF.2.00.0905271832320.53013@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
	<200905271152.34237.kirk@strauser.com>
	<20090527190230.GB9937@Grumpy.DynDNS.org>
	<alpine.BSF.2.00.0905272123120.54285@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.0905272123120.54285@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
Cc: FreeBSD-Questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: FreeBSD & Software RAID
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: FreeBSD-Questions@FreeBSD.org
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 20:06:48 -0000

On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 09:24:17PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> >I haven't looked at the ZFS code but this sort of thing is exactly why
> >all code I write uses int8_t, int16_t, int32_t, uint8_t, ... even when
> >the first thing I have to do with a new compiler is to work out the
> >proper typedefs to create them.
> 
> int, short and char are portable, only other things must be defined this 
> way.

No, they are not portable. "int" is 16 bits on many systems I work with.
char is sometimes signed, sometimes not. uint8_t is never signed and
always unambiguous.

> int8_t int16_t is just unneeded work. anyway - it's just defines, having 
> no effect on compiled code and it's performance.

No, they are not "just defines", I said "typedef". Typedef is subject to
stricter checking by the compiler.

Packing and alignment in structs is a big portability problem.

-- 
David Kelly N4HHE, dkelly@HiWAAY.net
========================================================================
Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad.