This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: RFC: All glibc machine maintainers: Is " RLIM_INFINITY as ((__rlim_t)-1)" OK?
- From: Roland McGrath <roland at hack dot frob dot com>
- To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- Cc: GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 22:15:37 -0700 (PDT)
- Subject: Re: RFC: All glibc machine maintainers: Is " RLIM_INFINITY as ((__rlim_t)-1)" OK?
- References: <CAMe9rOrVdp=Vq4RKX3Uh71E1+_UMJADgo0ahTaMBYgEj6OncBQ@mail.gmail.com>
> /* Structure which says how much of each resource has been used. The
> purpose of all the unions is to have the kernel-compatible layout
> while keeping the API type as 'long int', and among machines where
> __syscall_slong_t is not 'long int', this only does the right thing
> for little-endian ones, like x32. */
I would make the second sentence another paragraph separated by a blank
line (it's not all that interesting and the first sentence is all one
really needs to read unless looking for that sort of detail). But
otherwise that's great.