From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Jun  5 06:25:18 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC56816A41C
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Sun,  5 Jun 2005 06:25:18 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from PeterJeremy@optushome.com.au)
Received: from mail02.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail02.syd.optusnet.com.au
	[211.29.132.183])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B61643D1F
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Sun,  5 Jun 2005 06:25:17 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from PeterJeremy@optushome.com.au)
Received: from cirb503493.alcatel.com.au
	(c211-30-75-229.belrs2.nsw.optusnet.com.au [211.30.75.229])
	by mail02.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id
	j556PEKQ011871
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO);
	Sun, 5 Jun 2005 16:25:15 +1000
Received: from cirb503493.alcatel.com.au (localhost.alcatel.com.au [127.0.0.1])
	by cirb503493.alcatel.com.au (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id
	j556PERx037644; Sun, 5 Jun 2005 16:25:14 +1000 (EST)
	(envelope-from pjeremy@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au)
Received: (from pjeremy@localhost)
	by cirb503493.alcatel.com.au (8.12.10/8.12.9/Submit) id j556PDAN037643; 
	Sun, 5 Jun 2005 16:25:13 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from pjeremy)
Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2005 16:25:13 +1000
From: Peter Jeremy <PeterJeremy@optushome.com.au>
To: Matt Emmerton <matt@gsicomp.on.ca>
Message-ID: <20050605062513.GB31558@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au>
References: <42A242D1.4000002@nurfuerspam.de>
	<000701c5696f$0dee3b10$1200a8c0@gsicomp.on.ca>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <000701c5696f$0dee3b10$1200a8c0@gsicomp.on.ca>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2i
Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Martin <nakal@nurfuerspam.de>
Subject: Re: Optimizing libc/string for amd64(?)
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2005 06:25:19 -0000

On Sat, 2005-Jun-04 21:36:53 -0400, Matt Emmerton wrote:
>It would probably be better to use int64_t and int32_t instead of long/int,
>in order to make the intention more obvious.

The intent is to use the widest, efficiently supported type.  This is
'long' on all of our architectures.  int64_t has to be simulated
on i386 and is therefore not an idea choice.

-- 
Peter Jeremy