From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Miles Bader Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: view/edit large files Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 06:19:24 +0900 Message-ID: <87prhg7odf.fsf@catnip.gol.com> References: <86fxiuw6u7.fsf@lifelogs.com> <86zlgzqudo.fsf_-_@lifelogs.com> <86k583p96e.fsf@lifelogs.com> <874oz7grs0.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <864oz3nyj8.fsf@lifelogs.com> <864oz2l47t.fsf@lifelogs.com> <871vtw95s4.fsf@catnip.gol.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1234905604 25617 80.91.229.12 (17 Feb 2009 21:20:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 21:20:04 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 17 22:21:19 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LZXNN-0008RM-MV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2009 22:21:09 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57907 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LZXM3-0001tG-Fg for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2009 16:19:47 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LZXLx-0001pY-N0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2009 16:19:41 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LZXLx-0001oP-5W for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2009 16:19:41 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=34518 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LZXLw-0001oB-Tu for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2009 16:19:40 -0500 Original-Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:43713 helo=ciao.gmane.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LZXLw-00057R-Fe for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2009 16:19:40 -0500 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1LZXLs-00075B-7n for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2009 21:19:36 +0000 Original-Received: from 218.231.175.8.eo.eaccess.ne.jp ([218.231.175.8]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2009 21:19:36 +0000 Original-Received: from miles by 218.231.175.8.eo.eaccess.ne.jp with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 2009 21:19:36 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 34 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 218.231.175.8.eo.eaccess.ne.jp System-Type: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu Cancel-Lock: sha1:Hs/NZhF9wTmeRadse9EgxRSs3Zc= X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:109149 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> > Is off_t guaranteed to be 64-bit wide? If not, we lose the advantage >> > of the floats, no? >> >> If the system isn't capable of handling large files at all, then there's >> no point in worrying about it, right? > > Some systems can handle large files, but only if you use something > like off64_t. Sure, but using variant interfaces for large-file support is a much bigger and more intrusive change. Oh, BTW, of course there's a range of offsets which are still within 32-bits, and are representable by floats but not by emacs integers. A separate question is whether emacs should try to use something like _FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 by default or not (on linux/solaris/... that causes 64-bit variants of off_t, syscalls, etc, to be used even on 32-bit systems). >> No. The values being represented are integers. The user almost >> certainly will not be passing in a non-integral float > > I was thinking about 1234.99999 or some such, due to inaccuracies in > converting textual representation into a float. This should not happen with integer values (if it does, something is very wrong). -Miles -- Congratulation, n. The civility of envy.