Re: [PATCH 1/2] MinGW: Use pid_t more consequently, introduce uid_t for greater compatibility
- From
Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
- Date
- Dec 30, 2009, 11:11 UTC
- Message-ID
- <alpine.DEB.1.00.0912301209310.4985@pacific.mpi-cbg.de>
- In-Reply-To
- <bdca99240912291716g74c35f22r7599f2c254fb1b09@mail.gmail.com>
Hi,
On Wed, 30 Dec 2009, Sebastian Schuberth wrote:
> Anyway, IMHO the correct declaration of e.g. getuid() is not "int > getuid()", but "uid_t getuid()" etc. So even if the uid_t type was not > required, it's a good change I think.
FWIW I concur with this reasoning. Even if in this particular case, we could work around the issue, it is basically a non-intrusive, minimal janitorial patch. Especially since the original author of the wrong signature concurs.
Ciao, Dscho