看板 DFBSD_commit 關於我們 聯絡資訊
The poin is, guys, that sizeof(some_ridiculously_large_structure_or_array_ which_is_as_large_as_the_processes_entire_address_space) is just plain ridiculous, and sizeof() should not have been made to return size_t for something so silly. They could have added a usizeof() for the one in a million chance that someone actually needed something like that, but no... the idiots on the standard committee seem to believe that sizeof() is only EVER used in calls to read() or write(), verses, say, in generic exprssions that might, say, calculate an array index. for (i = 0; i < sizeof(ary)/sizeof(ary[0]); ++i) ... now, should i be unsigned here, or an int? it should be an int, plain and simple, for 99.99999% of the programs ever written. For the same reason, a TLS segment that is the size of the entire address space (or even 1/2 the entire address space), is also ridiculous. -Matt Matthew Dillon <dillon@backplane.com>