Mark D. Baushke wrote on 2005-11-15: > it would be more portable to use this: > > #ifndef SIZE_MAX > # define SIZE_MAX ((size_t)-1) > #endif > > because ((size_t)-1) will work even if size_t is narrower than int.
Yes. As explained on 2005-07-11, I prefer to write this as ((size_t)~(size_t)0) because this way we don't need to refer to ISO C 99 6.3.1.3.(2). Bruno _______________________________________________ bug-gnulib mailing list bug-gnulib@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnulib
