tech-userlevel archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: Proposal: _ctype_ table bitwidth change

To: tech-userlevel%NetBSD.org@localhost
Subject: Re: Proposal: _ctype_ table bitwidth change
From: Martin Husemann <martin%duskware.de@localhost>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 13:50:49 +0100

On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 12:36:00PM +0100, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> I don't think table size is a strong argument here -- 1024/1536 Bytes vs
> 512/768 Bytes. Second column if we want to allow the signed char wrap
> around "fix".

I prefer crashing instead of "fixing" that.

Martin

References:
- Re: Proposal: _ctype_ table bitwidth change
  - From: Joerg Sonnenberger
- Re: Proposal: _ctype_ table bitwidth change
  - From: T.SHIOZAKI
- Re: Proposal: _ctype_ table bitwidth change
  - From: Joerg Sonnenberger
- Re: Proposal: _ctype_ table bitwidth change
  - From: T.SHIOZAKI
- Re: Proposal: _ctype_ table bitwidth change
  - From: Joerg Sonnenberger

Prev by Date: Re: Proposal: _ctype_ table bitwidth change
Next by Date: Re: libquota proposal
Previous by Thread: Re: Proposal: _ctype_ table bitwidth change
Next by Thread: Re: Proposal: _ctype_ table bitwidth change
Indexes:

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index