From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Apr 12 20:49:49 2005
Return-Path: <owner-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 77E3816A4CE
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Tue, 12 Apr 2005 20:49:49 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from thor.66h.42h.de (mirsolutions.de [81.169.132.156])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 157A043D1F
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Tue, 12 Apr 2005 20:49:48 +0000 (GMT)	(envelope-from tg@66h.42h.de)
Received: from odem.66h.42h.de (root@odem.66h.42h.de
	[IPv6:2001:6f8:94d:1:2c0:9fff:fe1a:6a01])
	by thor.66h.42h.de (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j3CKng1n026665
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK);
	Tue, 12 Apr 2005 20:49:45 GMT
Received: from localhost (tg@localhost [IPv6:::1])
	by odem.66h.42h.de (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j3CKneA1018980
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
	Tue, 12 Apr 2005 20:49:41 GMT
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 20:49:39 +0000 (UTC)
From: Thorsten Glaser <tg@66h.42h.de>
In-Reply-To: <200504121945.j3CJj3Fr006856@cvs.openbsd.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSO.4.61L.0504122049090.4031@odem.66h.42h.de>
References: <200504121945.j3CJj3Fr006856@cvs.openbsd.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 15:55:49 +0000
cc: miros-discuss@mirbsd.org
cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
cc: tech@openbsd.org
Subject: Re: strtonum(3) in FreeBSD? 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
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: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 20:49:49 -0000

Theo de Raadt dixit:

>> >request that you use intmax_t rather than "long long" for the integers.
>> >Then the API scales cleanly when some future processor adds 128-bit ints.
>> >Since intmax_t is "long long" on all current platforms that wouldn't
>> >cause compatability problems with OpenBSD.
>> 
>> I second that. Cc'd to OpenBSD-Tech. Comments?

>If you must deal with octal and hex numbers, do it yourself.  This is
>not the typical case, and we specially avoid handling them to keep
>this simple.

You already said that, but what about using intmax_t as return type?

//mirabile