From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 07:18:19 +0100 From: Willy Tarreau Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/20] inflate: (arch) kill silly zlib typedefs Message-ID: <20051108061819.GA11460@alpha.home.local> References: <14.196662837@selenic.com> <20051031211422.GC4367@waste.org> <20051101065327.GP22601@alpha.home.local> <20051101085740.GR22601@alpha.home.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: To: Miles Bader Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven , Matt Mackall , Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Development , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 03:05:57PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote: > Willy Tarreau writes: > > I don't know if x86_64 is LP64 or LLP64 on Linux, but at least my alpha > > and sparc64 are LP64, so is another PPC64 I use for code validation. > > LPC64 is the recommended model for easier 32 to 64 portability (where > > ints are 32 ; long, longlong, ptrs are 64). > > Are there _any_ (widespread) platforms except Windows that use LLP64? I don't think so, ask google for LLP64 and click the second link (blogs), you will like it :-) Basically, they choose LLP64 because they have declared some structures as LONG (eg: in bitmaps) instead of making them int32 ! I didn't know that they were losers to the point of not understanding a typedef ! This may explain why they stopped supporting alpha long ago... > LP64 seems to be by far the most common in the unix world. it seems so, but I'd be interested in counter-examples too. > -miles > -- > "1971 pickup truck; will trade for guns" Willy