[reSIProcate] IPv6 on 64 bit

[Daniel Pocock]

I've done a rough conversion and committed it on the branch

https://svn.resiprocate.org/rep/resiprocate/branches/b-pocock-stdint

The test cases run successfully (I only did one test so far, recompiling
everything, I'll get on to some more testing as you suggest before any
merge)

Most of it was done with sed (look at my script in the scripts
directory), but there are three things that need manual attention

- Data has some constructors where I feel we could use the new types
exclusively, I've tweaked it and removed one constructor.  I had to do
this anyway as it was giving errors due to the fact that some of the
types were too similar

- rutil/resipfaststreams.hxx needed some tweaking of the snprintf code. 
I couldn't get PRIu64 to work universally, so I've just left it as "%lu"
which is not ideal for all platforms.

- we should probably do a hunt through the code for other things like
the unsigned long usage that I recently rectified.  This is not an
essential step before the merge but maybe we can improve some other things.

Any other testing or feedback is welcome of course


On 25/07/13 17:08, Byron Campen wrote:
>
> To maintain source compat, we shouldn't undef the stuff we have.
> First, we should ensure that the c++-11 types are defined one way or
> another, and then typedef the old resip int types based on the
> standard types. Then, begin converting the resip codebase over to the
> standard ones entirely (easily scriptable, and not likely to result in
> funny stuff like "this std::vector of conditions" in a license block).
>
> Best regards,
> Byron Campen
>
> On Jul 25, 2013 4:21 AM, "Daniel Pocock" <daniel at pocock.com.au
> <mailto:daniel at pocock.com.au>> wrote:
>
>     On 19/07/13 17:14, Byron Campen wrote:
>     >
>     > Generally, we use the resip-defined UInt32, but something that
>     we may
>     > want to start thinking about is to move over to using the now
>     standard
>     > integer types defined in c++-11. Not sure how far back support for
>     > these goes; we may need to supply typedefs for them in some
>     cases, but
>     > we should start building the good habit now.
>     >
>
>     Using the new types will make it more natural for people new to the
>     codebase as well
>
>     I'm going to start doing this in trunk today and we simply need to
>     have
>     a plan for compatibility before taking it into the release branch
>
>     I would propose that:
>
>     - with a C++11 build, we use <cstdint>   (#if __cplusplus >= 201103L)
>     and define stuff like:
>     using std::uint8_t;
>     using std::uint32_t;
>     because we are not "using namespace std;" in every source file.
>
>     - we fall back to <stdint.h> if possible  (#ifdef HAVE_STDINT_H from
>     autotools / config.h)
>
>     - if that fails, we define the C++11 types ourselves in
>     rutil/compat.hxx  (#ifndef uint32_t) using typedef
>
>     Does this seem reasonable and likely to work widely?  Have you seen
>     alternative approaches or extra things I should add?
>
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.resiprocate.org/pipermail/resiprocate-devel/attachments/20130725/650ddccf/attachment.htm>