Hi
Jørgen Løland wrote:
>>> @@ -737,11 +806,25 @@ uint Image_info::ts_count() const
>>>
>>> /// Returns total number of tables in the image.
>>> inline
>>> -ulong Image_info::table_count() const
>>> +uint Image_info::table_count() const
>>
>> [6] Why did you change to uint from ulong? Will this cause issues or
>> are you fixing issues?
>
> This is a fix. The method returns the value of a private variable of
> type ulong. I think the method signature should use the same number of
> bits for the return value.
>
I'd rather fix it by changing the type of m_table_count to ulong. The original
reason for using ulong here was that on 16-bit platforms uint limits the number
of tables per snapshot to 64k which, in my opinion, did not leave a big enough
margin. True that it is hard to find 16-bit platforms these days, but why not to
write "safer" code if it costs nothing but a conscious choice of a type.
As for return types for other *_count() functions, they are different for
different kinds of objects. For example snap_count() returns ushort because
there are always at most 256 snapshots per image. Db_count() returns uint
because there are unlikely to be more than 64k databases per snapshot
(disputable assumption, I can agree).
If we want to make return types uniform, then I'd rather change all of them to
ulong.
Rafal
