Re: size_t vs "unsigned long"
- From
- Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@mac.com>
- Date
- Oct 5, 2007, 06:27 UTC
- Message-ID
- <620B5C1C-CFE8-401B-8BC7-D89C8740D63B@mac.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <877im3khj0.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
On Oct 03, 2007, at 17:36:03, Florian Weimer wrote:
Show 8 quoted lines
> * Pierre Habouzit: >> Well, afaict, on every linux archs I know of, unsigned longs and >> size_t are the same. > > IIRC, 64-bit Windows uses 64-bit points (duh) and hence a 64-bit > size_t, but still has got 32-bit longs. Documentation is a bit > sparse on this matter (because you are supposed to use LONG, DWORD > and friends anyway).
For reference, Linux is always an LP32 (long-and-pointer-are-32-bit) or LP64 (long-and-pointer-are-64-bit) platform. On the other hand, for crappy backwards-compat reasons, Windows is either LP32 or LLP64 (long-long-and-pointer-are-64-bit). I think most of the remaining UNIXes fall into the LP32/LP64 category, the LLP64 platforms are fairly rare (thankfully).
Cheers, Kyle Moffett