httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ben Laurie <...@algroup.co.uk>
Subject Re: cvs commit: httpd-2.0/server/mpm/threaded threaded.c
Date Sat, 05 May 2001 08:35:27 GMT
Jim Jagielski wrote:
> 
> Jeff Trawick wrote:
> >
> > Maybe my point wasn't taken.  Rephrased more simply.
> >
> > INT_MAX still has to be the largest value that can be stored in a
> > signed int, so
> >
> > on a 16-bit machine, INT_MAX will be 32767
> > on a 32-bit machine, INT_MAX will be 2billion or so
> >
> > Therefore, bringing "32767" into the discussion means bringing
> > Apache-on-16-bit into the discussion.
> >
> > I seriously doubt we would want to hack up Apache *and* APR *and*
> > expat *and* PCRE *and* whatever else to work on a 16-bit machine.  I
> > seriously doubt that any publically released version of Apache has
> > ever worked on a 16-bit machine.
> >
> > So let's put the "32767" part of the discussion to rest.
> >
> 
> A machine can be ANSI compliant and have INT_MAX == 32767 and
> have as many bits as it wants. All ANSI does is set a lower
> limit to INT_MAX. ANSI doesn't define the number of bits per any
> type, except setting that char must be at least 8 bits. At that
> point, ANSI does not bring "number of bits" into any discussions
> at all (IIRC).

If INT_MAX is 32767, then so is the maximum index into an array. So,
regardless of bitness, that's clearly a platform we ain't supporting.

Cheers,

Ben.

--
http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html

"There is no limit to what a man can do or how far he can go if he
doesn't mind who gets the credit." - Robert Woodruff

Mime
View raw message