+1
On 09/11/2017 11:27 AM, Florin Coras wrote:
Hi Chris,
Personally, I’d like to enforce the use of u32. Is it an option to
just replace all occurrences of uint32_t in ip.h/mpls.h?
Thanks,
Florin
On Sep 11, 2017, at 7:55 AM, Luke, Chris <chris_l...@comcast.com
<mailto:chris_l...@comcast.com>> wrote:
For discussion: VPP has traditionally used its own fixed-width types,
such as u32 and u64 and only uses standard types when referring to
the external world (eg, to talk to libc, etc). Recently I’ve noticed
the C99 variant, uint32_t creeping in more and into VPP internal
matters. As a matter of style and consistency, which should we as a
project be using?
Reason I ask: The recent MPLS patch (https://gerrit.fd.io/r/#/c/8371)
uses both styles in .h files but doesn’t have stdint.h included in
any path leading to those .h’s; Coverity appears to be fussy about
this – it checks that all types used in a .h are defined in the scope
of that .h. Upshot is that Coverity is balking at this and only 54%
of the project now compiles under Coverity
To resolve the issue with Coverity, I am torn with adding “#include
<stdint.h>” to ip.h/mpls.h to fix it where it happens, or just accept
that humans are inconsistent and add it to vppinfra/types.h. Thoughts?
Chris.
_______________________________________________
vpp-dev mailing list
vpp-dev@lists.fd.io <mailto:vpp-dev@lists.fd.io>
https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev
_______________________________________________
vpp-dev mailing list
vpp-dev@lists.fd.io
https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev
_______________________________________________
vpp-dev mailing list
vpp-dev@lists.fd.io
https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev
