This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [ada] fix unaligned access

From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
To: Florian Weimer <fw at deneb dot enyo dot de>
Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 15:18:34 -0800
Subject: Re: [ada] fix unaligned access
References: <20020206125546.A17826@redhat.com> <87pu3i8exz.fsf@deneb.enyo.de>

On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 10:42:48PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> Perhaps you should use "long", this will cure the Y2038 problem on
> some platforms.  In any case, the Ada side should use the appropriate
> type from Interfaces.C.

You mean continue to get rid of time_t in the C interface
but use "long" instead of "Integer"?  Seems reasonable.

r~

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [ada] fix unaligned access
  - From: Florian Weimer

References:
- [ada] fix unaligned access
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: [ada] fix unaligned access
  - From: Florian Weimer

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]