From: Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@mac.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2007 06:27:05 GMT
Subject: Re: size_t vs "unsigned long"
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:
> * 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