[alsa-devel] linux vs c99 fixed width types
Hi Takashi, & list
it is quite likely that we will be moving our own codebase to use the C99 fixed width types rather than our own e.g. uint32_t vs HW32 etc.
Currently HW32 is translated into u32 before I submit patches to you. Should I do the same for the C99 types, or let them pass through unaltered?
regards
On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 01:13:26PM +1200, Eliot Blennerhassett wrote:
Currently HW32 is translated into u32 before I submit patches to you. Should I do the same for the C99 types, or let them pass through unaltered?
Linux standard is to use u32 and friends rather than the C99 types.
At Fri, 2 Jul 2010 11:28:51 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 01:13:26PM +1200, Eliot Blennerhassett wrote:
Currently HW32 is translated into u32 before I submit patches to you. Should I do the same for the C99 types, or let them pass through unaltered?
Linux standard is to use u32 and friends rather than the C99 types.
Yes, I also prefer u32 and co unless they must be C99 types (e.g. exported and shared with user-space).
thanks,
Takashi
participants (3)
-
Eliot Blennerhassett -
Mark Brown -
Takashi Iwai