Closed Bug 646071 Opened 9 years ago Closed 9 years ago

Remove nsInt64 and nsUint64

Categories

(Core :: XPCOM, defect)

x86
macOS
defect
Not set

Tracking

()

RESOLVED FIXED
mozilla5

People

(Reporter: ehsan, Assigned: jrmuizel)

References

()

Details

Attachments

(3 files)

I think nsInt64 and nsUint64 are not useful any more, since we already have code which fails to compile if the compiler doesn't support 64-bit arithmetic.  So I think we should just kill these two types, and replace them with PRInt64 and PRUint64.

Benjamin, do you agree?
Yes, I thought I r+ed a patch a long time ago to remove them. Not sure where, though.
Assignee: ehsan → jmuizelaar
Fix all the associated compiler problems.
I started on part 3 which removes all the uses of nsInt64, I didn't get that far yet.
Attachment #522754 - Flags: review?(benjamin)
Attachment #522758 - Flags: review?(benjamin)
Comment on attachment 522923 [details] [diff] [review]
Part 3: Remove nsInt64.h, and convert all uses of nsInt64 and nsUint64 in the tree to PRInt64 and PRUint64, respectively

Personally, I'd suggest dropping the explicit conversions of literals and let them happen implicitly.
(In reply to comment #6)
> Personally, I'd suggest dropping the explicit conversions of literals and let
> them happen implicitly.

I don't care much either way, but it's a lot of work, so I'll let Benjamin weigh in before doing the work.  :-)
Attachment #522754 - Flags: review?(benjamin) → review+
Comment on attachment 522758 [details] [diff] [review]
Part 2: replace nsInt64 with a typedef to PRInt64

We're removing the typedef in the next patch, right?
Attachment #522758 - Flags: review?(benjamin) → review+
Attachment #522923 - Flags: review?(benjamin) → review+
http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/72fd2dac7505
http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/ff09586ff85a
http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/b7bfd0871b3f
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 9 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Whiteboard: fixed-in-cedar
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla2.2
Blocks: 647481
Was this announced anywhere?
(In reply to comment #11)
> Was this announced anywhere?

The removal was not, the deprecation was. Would an announcement have been valuable?
(In reply to comment #11)
> Was this announced anywhere?

My apologies, we should have let the comm-central folks know beforehand.  I guess I owe you guys an editor fix of some sort now... :)
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.