4 Feb
2011
4 Feb
'11
4:09 a.m.
On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 06:11:38AM +0000, Daniel Peebles wrote:
Knowing nothing about the package or its code, it looks like a typo to me. The stdint.h naming of types would have it be uint64_t, not uint_64t. Could that be it?
While it does indeed solve the problem, technically the whole code redefine stdint, so uint_64t is actually not a typo, but the way it's been defined. That's one of the reason I don't really like this implementation; looks like a #ifdef nightmare to support (too) old environment. -- Vincent