On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 14:10:30 -0800 (PST)
Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> wrote:
> What I REALLY meant to
> say was that it should be signed... i.e. an int or a long, rather
> then unsigned. In the case of sizeof() I have to agree with
> chris... it should be an 'int' if it is small enough to fit, and a
> 'long' otherwise, and overflow values should not be allowed
> (generate a compile time error) or there should be separate
> keyword, like usizeof(), which returns the value as unsigned.
Or just
sizeof(struct foo)U
:)
-Chris