apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject Re: RFC: APR_LARGEFILE flag for APR 0.9
Date Fri, 26 Mar 2004 05:34:59 GMT
At 06:03 PM 3/25/2004, Joe Orton wrote:
>On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 03:49:09PM -0800, Stas Bekman wrote:
>> 
>> That's a bad idea, IMHO, because ARP_HAS_LARGE_FILES will still report 
>> false. You suggest to create a mess, where the library will report one 
>> thing but behave as another.
>
>I was thinking about this today as well... what do you expect
>APR_HAS_LARGE_FILES to actually mean?  "sizeof(apr_off_t) >
>sizeof(apr_size_t)"?  or "sizeof(apr_off_t) > off_t"?  or
>sizeof(apr_off_t)==8?  Any of these are trivial to implement in the
>configure script.

.02 euro (worth more than US 2c) from the guy who invented the flag?

APR_HAS_LARGE_FILES means that an apr_off_t is bigger than
all addressable memory (size_t).  You can't fit the apr_off_t into any
[apr_][s]size_t placeholder.

Honestly I dont care if there is any relationship between óff_t and
apr_off_t, otherwise why did we define our own type?  It's (possibly)
an implementation dependent detail but otherwise irrelevant.

Bill



Mime
View raw message