httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dean Gaudet <dgau...@arctic.org>
Subject Re: [PATCH] PR#344: 64-bit cleanup
Date Wed, 09 Jul 1997 22:02:28 GMT
In 16-bit x86 large data memory models (int)(char *)1 != 1, depending on
the compiler.  Not that this is necessarily a concern... generic_data at
least makes this possible. 

Nothing in the standard says you can futz with integers and pointers this
way.

command_rec and its ilk could have both a info_ptr and info_int field.

Dean

On Wed, 9 Jul 1997, Paul Sutton wrote:

> On Wed, 9 Jul 1997, Dean Gaudet wrote:
> > All the XtOffsetOf() are integers, used by set_string_slot and it's kin.
> 
> Umm, I thought this might be a problem.  But surely no single structure
> would have an offset anyway near the max representable in a pointer. So
> isn't it in practise quite safe to cast the result of XtOffsetOf to be a
> pointer? It might be a _little_ bit naughty (but safe), and nowhere nearly
> as bad as using a generic data type for cmd_info if it can be avoided. 
> 
> //pcs
> 
> 


Mime
View raw message