Re: PROPOSAL: dot-proc interface [was: /proc stuff]

[Jakob Østergaard]

On Sun, Nov 04, 2001 at 08:41:34PM +0100, Tim Jansen wrote:
> On Sunday 04 November 2001 20:24, Jakob Østergaard wrote:
> > Does this work ?   Yes of course.  But what if I ported my program to
> > a 64 bit arch...  The program still compiles.  It also runs.  But the
> > values are no longer correct.   Now *that* is hell.
> 
> Actually I worry more about those programs that are already compiled and will 
> break when the kernel changes. But even if you recompile the code, how can 
> you be sure that the programmer uses longs instead of ints for those 64 bit 
> types? The C compiler allows the implicit conversion without warning. If you 
> change the type the program has to be changed, no matter what you do.

int get(result_t * result);

u32 a;
get(&a);

This will fail at compile time if result_t is 64 bits.

In C++ you could even do overloading where conversion is possible and
still have compile time errors when it's not possible.

> 
> > I want type information.
> 
> BTW nobody says to one-value-files can not have types (see my earlier posts 
> in this thread).

I don't dislike one-value-files - please tell me how you get type information

-- 
................................................................
:   [e-mail]   : And I see the elder races,         :
:.........................: putrid forms of man                :
:   Jakob Østergaard      : See him rise and claim the earth,  :
:        OZ9ABN           : his downfall is at hand.           :
:.........................:............{Konkhra}...............: