[interfacekit] Re: BHandler::fToken, int32 or... uint32!??!?
- From: "Axel Dörfler" <axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: interfacekit@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 03:00:16 +0100 CET
"Adi Oanca" <e2joseph@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> You guys were talking about BHandler::fToken taking values that reach
> 4.294.967.295, but it is just an int32! That means that it's value
> range is
> form -2.147.483.647 to +2.147.483.648!
>
> I ask you that, because by looking in TokenSpace sources I'm not
> finding the
> location where you initialize fTokenCount with -2.147.483.647 !
2 billion, 4 billion, who cares=3F ;-))
Seriously, I don't know if we have to reserve the range smaller than
zero to express failure codes - if we have to we should stick with
int32, if not, we could just switch to uint32 and nobody would see any
difference (that's the theory :).
Adios...
Axel.
- Follow-Ups:
- [interfacekit] Re: BHandler::fToken, int32 or... uint32!??!?
- From: Marcus Overhagen
- References:
- [interfacekit] BHandler::fToken, int32 or... uint32!??!?
- From: Adi Oanca
Other related posts:
- » [interfacekit] BHandler::fToken, int32 or... uint32!??!?
- » [interfacekit] Re: BHandler::fToken, int32 or... uint32!??!?
- » [interfacekit] Re: BHandler::fToken, int32 or... uint32!??!?
- » [interfacekit] Re: BHandler::fToken, int32 or... uint32!??!?
- [interfacekit] Re: BHandler::fToken, int32 or... uint32!??!?
- From: Marcus Overhagen
- [interfacekit] BHandler::fToken, int32 or... uint32!??!?
- From: Adi Oanca