Re: sscanf (x, "%u", &(uint64_t))

To: mutt-dev@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: sscanf (x, "%u", &(uint64_t))
From: David Laight <david-mutt@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 20:32:19 +0000
In-reply-to: <20050321012119.GB15098@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:mutt-dev-request@mutt.org?body=unsubscribe>
Mail-followup-to: mutt-dev@xxxxxxxx
References: <20050319072145.GD25808@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050319080718.GA39342@xxxxxxxxxx> <20050319085014.GF25808@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050319092223.GA2052@xxxxxxxxxx> <20050319095150.GH25808@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050319121031.GD7587@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050320134345.GA26252@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050321012119.GB15098@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-mutt-dev@xxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i

On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 10:21:20AM +0900, Tamotsu Takahashi wrote:
> 
> I have only 32bit machines, so, uint32_t is unsigned int.
> Now there is no problem for _me_.

Are you sure, uint32_t could easily be unsigned long.
In which case you would need %ul in order to remove the compiler
warnings.

        David

-- 
David Laight: david@xxxxxxxxx

Follow-Ups:
- Re: sscanf (x, "%u", &(uint64_t))
  - From: Thomas Glanzmann

References:
- sscanf (x, "%u", &(uint64_t))
  - From: TAKAHASHI Tamotsu
- Re: sscanf (x, "%u", &(uint64_t))
  - From: YONETANI Tomokazu
- Re: sscanf (x, "%u", &(uint64_t))
  - From: TAKAHASHI Tamotsu
- Re: sscanf (x, "%u", &(uint64_t))
  - From: Oswald Buddenhagen
- Re: sscanf (x, "%u", &(uint64_t))
  - From: TAKAHASHI Tamotsu
- Re: sscanf (x, "%u", &(uint64_t))
  - From: Thomas Glanzmann
- Re: sscanf (x, "%u", &(uint64_t))
  - From: Thomas Glanzmann
- Re: sscanf (x, "%u", &(uint64_t))
  - From: Tamotsu Takahashi

Prev by Date: Re: LDAP query_command to use with Active Directory? (solved)
Next by Date: Re: sscanf (x, "%u", &(uint64_t))
Previous by thread: Re: sscanf (x, "%u", &(uint64_t))
Next by thread: Re: sscanf (x, "%u", &(uint64_t))
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread