|
|
|
|
|
|
by mananaysiempre
1293 days ago
|
|
|
No, ssize_t is not the signed version. As best as I can tell, the only things POSIX says about ssize_t is that[1] it is an integer type that can hold integer values in [-1, SSIZE_MAX], where[2] SSIZE_MAX ≥ _POSIX_SSIZE_MAX = 32767, not that it should have any particular relation to size_t. In the standard, it is used for byte counts in I/O, like the return value of read() (traditionally int), for the return value of strfmon() and strfmon_l() (OK I guess, though the C standard stuck with int for *printf()), and for the argument to swab() (wat). Note that neither is ptrdiff_t guaranteed to be that signed version, or to hold any possible value in the domain of size_t or (strictly speaking) any possible object size. Both GCC and Clang assume the latter, though, and can miscompile[3] code that relies on (e.g.) malloc() succeeding for sizes > 2^31 on a 32-bit system. [1] https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/basedefs/sy... [2] https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/basedefs/li... [3] https://trust-in-soft.com/blog/2016/05/20/objects-larger-tha... |
|
|