Re: introducing flags_t

To: tech-kern%netbsd.org@localhost
Subject: Re: introducing flags_t
From: David Holland <dholland-tech%netbsd.org@localhost>
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2009 08:25:22 +0000

On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 12:48:05PM +0200, Alan Barrett wrote:
 > > So the only plausible problem is if the compiler saturates the (1 << 31)
 > > calculation generating ((1 << 31) - 1). I don't think gcc ever does this!
 > 
 > But some other compiler could, since the result is undefined.

Indeed.

However, adding a new typedef isn't going to fix this...

-- 
David A. Holland
dholland%netbsd.org@localhost

References:
- introducing flags_t
  - From: Christoph Egger
- re: introducing flags_t
  - From: matthew green
- Re: introducing flags_t
  - From: David Laight
- Re: introducing flags_t
  - From: Alan Barrett

Prev by Date: Re: Opencomm: proplib-based syscall
Next by Date: Re: unmounting all filesystems (was Re: CVS commit: src/sys)
Previous by Thread: Re: introducing flags_t
Next by Thread: vaccess() and ntfs_access() and...
Indexes:

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index