Re: [Cake] [PATCH 1/2] cake: print_uint format fixes

["Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@toke.dk>]

Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org> writes:

>> > Using the ‘PRId64’ macro won’t work because print_int is using ‘int’
>> > type internally whereas print_uint uses ‘uint64_t’ internally. So the
>> > format string has to have knowledge of the internal format, *but*
>> > there’s no clue of the difference in internal format offered by the
>> > function name i.e. print_int vs print_uint.
>> >
>> > I’d argue it makes more sense to have: print_int/print_uint as the
>> > native int length, that hopefully match up with %u & %d and then have
>> > print_int64/print_uint64 where use of formats PRId64 & PRIu64 is
>> > advised.  
>> 
>> Yes, this was basically what I meant by "grating"; I really do agree
>> that this API is confusing.
>> 
>> Stephen, would you accept patches to fix the API (to add
>> print_{u,}int64() variants and turn print_uint() into native-int size)?
>> Or should we stick with the API currently there and live with the
>> inconsistency? :)
>> 
>> -Toke
>
> I agree print_int should take int, print_uint should take unsigned
> int, and there should be print_u64 (and print_u32, print_u8)

Cool. Kevin, do you feel like submitting a patch? :)

-Toke