ppp
ppp copied to clipboard
ppp-project
Prefer size_t over int where possible
This avoids needless truncation, which takes up multiple more instructions on some architectures, especially older ones.
These fixes look mostly good. Though, some cases the refactoring changes the structure ... Comments inline to for @paulusmack to review.
I have mixed feelings about these changes. It's reasonable to use size_t for things that are the length of a structure or a string, but I don't think that the savings in code size will be significant either in space or time. There's also a lot of changes spread out across the source tree which could be better as separate commits.
I have mixed feelings about these changes. It's reasonable to use size_t for things that are the length of a structure or a string, but I don't think that the savings in code size will be significant either in space or time. There's also a lot of changes spread out across the source tree which could be better as separate commits.
I think they would be best done at once, that's why, since they all have the same theme.
I notice also that the signoff is a noreply.github.com address, which I don't consider adequate.
@AtariDreams: Have you seen the @paulusmack comment? What is the situation with your signoff?
@AtariDreams: Have you seen @paulusmack comments started:
- https://github.com/ppp-project/ppp/pull/415#pullrequestreview-1795621594
Note: The other PR has been merged :)
@AtariDreams: Have you looked? It will be good to have a solution before 2.5.1 release...
As far as I can see, there is no functional change here (or at least, none intended), so I am not going to wait for this.