On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 08:54:47AM -0700, Gurucharan Shetty wrote: > On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 4:08 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 04:04:09PM -0700, Jarno Rajahalme wrote: > >> > >> On Aug 26, 2014, at 3:53 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: > >> > >> > On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 03:42:33PM -0700, Jarno Rajahalme wrote: > >> >> Finally, use change the storage type of 'values_inline' to uint8_t, as > >> >> uint64_t looks kind of wide for a boolean, even though we intend the > >> >> bit be carved out from the uint64_t where 'map' resides. > >> > > >> > It can't be type "bool"? > >> > >> From CodingStyle: > >> > >> Declare bit-fields to be type "unsigned int" or "signed int". Do > >> *not* declare bit-fields of type "int": C89 allows these to be either > >> signed or unsigned according to the compiler's whim. (A 1-bit > >> bit-field of type "int" may have a range of -1...0!) Do not declare > >> bit-fields of type _Bool or enum or any other type, because these are > >> not portable. > >> > >> :-) > > > > This was important when we supported C89 compilers that did not have > > native _Bool (bool), but I think that it is obsolete now, because all > > of the compilers we support have C99 implementations good enough to > > have native _Bool. > > > > Let's find out and update CodingStyle if so. > > > > Guru: does MSVC allow "bool" bit-fields? I assume so but it's worth a > > test. > > You mean something like this, right? If so, it does work.
Thanks. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
