[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [lvm-devel] Re: [dm-devel] what to do with fls(x) (or device-mapper & swsusp-1.x.x ? )



> On Monday 01 September 2003 18:30, Luca Berra wrote:
> > the issue is that fls(x) function in 2.6 use int, same as the fls(x) in
> > the swsusp patches, while fls(x) in dm patches use unsigned int.
> > so which would the correct implementation of fls be?
> 
> The declaration in the standard library is correct by definition, and mine
> was 
> incorrect, regardless of which is more sensible.
> 
> However, since the automatic type conversion (which generates no code)
> works 
> fine, there is no reason not to use the more descriptive 'unsigned' 
> declaration for variables.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Daniel

Thanks for the clarification 

Regards,

Svetoslav

-- 
COMPUTERBILD 15/03: Premium-e-mail-Dienste im Test
--------------------------------------------------
1. GMX TopMail - Platz 1 und Testsieger!
2. GMX ProMail - Platz 2 und Preis-Qualitätssieger!
3. Arcor - 4. web.de - 5. T-Online - 6. freenet.de - 7. daybyday - 8. e-Post




[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]