You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@arrow.apache.org by "Arkadiy Vertleyb (BLOOMBERG/ 120 PARK)" <av...@bloomberg.net> on 2022/06/08 17:39:33 UTC

Re:int64_t vs size_t

Corrected the message title.

From: dev@arrow.apache.org At: 06/08/22 13:35:23 UTC-4:00To:  dev@arrow.apache.org
Subject: int8_t vs size_t

Hi all.

Throughout the entire project, int64_t rather than size_t is consistently used 
to denote size and offset.

This causes massive amount of compiler warnings in the 32 bit system.

Is it an oversight or a conscious design decision?  If latter, what is the 
reason behind it?

Thanks,
Arkadiy

Re: int64_t vs size_t

Posted by Micah Kornfield <em...@gmail.com>.

>
> Is it an oversight or a conscious design decision?  If latter, what is the
> reason behind it?

This comes from the style guide (Google) [1] the project adapted

[1] https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html#Integer_Types
On Wed, Jun 8, 2022 at 10:39 AM Arkadiy Vertleyb (BLOOMBERG/ 120 PARK) <
avertleyb@bloomberg.net> wrote:

> Corrected the message title.
>
> From: dev@arrow.apache.org At: 06/08/22 13:35:23 UTC-4:00To:
> dev@arrow.apache.org
> Subject: int8_t vs size_t
>
> Hi all.
>
> Throughout the entire project, int64_t rather than size_t is consistently
> used
> to denote size and offset.
>
> This causes massive amount of compiler warnings in the 32 bit system.
>
> Is it an oversight or a conscious design decision?  If latter, what is the
> reason behind it?
>
> Thanks,
> Arkadiy
>
>