Re: [PATCH] ptrdiff_t is not uintptr_t, damnit

David Brownell
2007-08-20T00:20:18Z

On Sunday 19 August 2007, Al Viro wrote:
> is wrong; for one thing, it's a bad C (it's what uintptr_t is for; in general
> we are not even promised that ptrdiff_t is large enough to hold a pointer,

ISTR we don't *have* a uintptr_t on all architectures, or that would
be the appropriate thing to use in these 32/64 bit ABI scenarios.

> Use unsigned long or uintptr_t instead.

I suspect you mean "unsigned long long"...

- Dave