From: Junio C Hamano Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 16:31:44 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH] xmalloc: include size in the failure message Message-ID: <7vd3tdckjz.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <1282316991-23320-1-git-send-email-Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr> Matthieu Moy writes: >> Under NO_C99_FORMAT the format and the argument would not match if size_t >> is not the same size as uint. As the one in sha1_file.c seems to be done >> in a better way, let's use that one. > > Sounds good. Not sure why we don't basically use the %lu version > everywhere though. I have been wondering about the same thing, but perhaps because we won't have to worry too much about size_t needing to be unsigned long long on older platforms where %z is not supported, while we expect %z will be available on larger where using %lu may become an issue?