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 17:34:51 UTC

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: int8_t vs size_t

Posted by Antoine Pitrou <an...@python.org>.

Hi,

It is a conscious decision of following the Google C++ style guide:
https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html#Integer_Types

I agree that size_t (or ssize_t) would have been a better choice for 
in-memory lengths and sizes. Unfortunately, that ship has sailed now.

32-bit systems are a bit legacy though, is there any particular reason 
you want to support them?

Regards

Antoine.


Le 08/06/2022 à 19:34, Arkadiy Vertleyb (BLOOMBERG/ 120 PARK) a écrit :
> 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