Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 15:06:41 -0400
Message-Id: <200106191906.PAA21242@envy.delorie.com>
X-Authentication-Warning: envy.delorie.com: dj set sender to dj AT envy DOT delorie DOT com using -f
From: DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <200106191900.VAA18430@father.ludd.luth.se> (message from Martin
	Str|mberg on Tue, 19 Jun 2001 21:00:10 +0200 (MET DST))
Subject: Re: size_t and ssize_t
References:  <200106191900 DOT VAA18430 AT father DOT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


> Any particular reason for not having "#define __DJ_ssize_t
> typedef long int ssize_t"? Or even "long signed int ssize_t"?

There is no reason for or against any change.  Nobody is supposed to
know what those types are, so it shouldn't matter what they are.  Is
there a specific reason for the change?