A question for you all: size_t or unsigned int

[martin f krafft]

also sprach Paul Harris <paulharris at computer.org> [2008.11.13.1254 +0100]:
> does anyone know what the "standard" policy is on this?  from what I can
> tell, size_t will allow you to store the largest integer number on that

*unsigned*

> platform (eg max memory address etc) whereas unsigned int is the most
> efficient integer size...

int is defined to be 32bits, I think. So the question is really: is
max(size_t) platform dependent or not. If it is, then we ought to
avoid that, I think. If it isn't, then it's just the same as
unsigned int. Thus, unsigned int, might be the better choice.

-- 
 .''`.   martin f. krafft <madduck at debian.org>
: :'  :  proud Debian developer, author, administrator, and user
`. `'`   http://people.debian.org/~madduck - http://debiansystem.info
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
 
micro$oft encrypts your windows nt password when stored on a windows
ce device. but if you look carefully at their encryption algorithm,
they simply xor the password with "susageP", Pegasus spelled
backwards. Pegasus is the code name of windows ce. this is so pathetic
it's staggering.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/libkdtree-devel/attachments/20081113/4e16a0e9/attachment.pgp