Re: [PATCH] base32, base64: prefer signed to unsigned integers

[Simon Josefsson]

Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu> writes:

> -extern void base64_encode (const char *restrict in, size_t inlen,
> -                           char *restrict out, size_t outlen);
> +extern void base64_encode (const char *restrict in, idx_t inlen,
> +                           char *restrict out, idx_t outlen);

Thanks for improving the code -- however, the API is quite wide spread
already, and size_t (or unsigned int) is widely used for many other
base64 APIs so this change causes friction at the API level.  What do
you think?  I'm not sure I understand why idx_t is better than size_t
here, can you elaborate?  Why not ssize_t?  Maybe a compromise is to
keep the old API but add new APIs with idx_t types and the
implementation of the old functions uses the new one.

/Simon

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature