Date: Tue, 19 Sep 1995 22:10:56 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans) Cc: bakul@netcom.com, terry@lambert.org, freebsd-hackers@freefall.freebsd.org, hsu@cs.hut.fi Subject: Re: Policy on printf format specifiers? Message-ID: <199509200510.WAA15752@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <199509200455.OAA10868@godzilla.zeta.org.au> from "Bruce Evans" at Sep 20, 95 02:55:30 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >I don't really care whether I have to add additional unsigned short based > >functions or not, though using wchar_t as a 16 bit unsigned value would > >save a lot of code duplication and kernel bloat. > > You have to add additional u_int16_t based functions to support externally > imposed 16-bit storage formats, and u_int32_t based functions to support > 32-bit storage formats (not to mention u_int36_t based functions to > support 36-bit storage formats :-). I don't know of *any* file system that uses 4 byte characters to store directory entries. I know of two that use 16. 36 bit: I don't have a DEC KL10 or Harris system. Are you saying there is a port in progess? 8-). Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199509200510.WAA15752>