Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2008 00:37:59 +0700 From: Max Khon <fjoe@samodelkin.net> To: Pietro Cerutti <gahr@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, ports@freebsd.org, bug-followup <bug-followup@freebsd.org>, fjoe@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports/124985: [patch] devel/dmucs unbreak on 64bits archs Message-ID: <48725477.8050307@samodelkin.net> In-Reply-To: <48725051.3090601@FreeBSD.org> References: <200807071619.m67GJrPt096421@freefall.freebsd.org> <487245AE.1030307@FreeBSD.org> <20080707164119.GG17123@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <48725051.3090601@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello! Pietro Cerutti wrote: > | On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 06:34:54PM +0200, Pietro Cerutti wrote: > |> I definitely do not agree. Please note that a pointer is not required to > |> fit into a long, while it is required to fit into a size_t. > | I do not think that C99 requires the size_t to be capable of holding > | the pointer. size_t is only required to hold result of sizeof. > > size_t is required to be of rank equal to or greater than any other > object you can create from within the C language. This implies that it > can (i.e., it is required to be able to) hold a pointer type. Does it? http://bytes.com/forum/thread735346.html /fjoe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?48725477.8050307>