Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
[ANN] coThreads 0.10
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2007-09-18 (12:58)
From: Markus E L <ls-ocaml-2006@m...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] [ANN] coThreads 0.10

Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:

> skaller wrote:
>> But it isn't an errno value that is reported, it is the index
>> of the variant that is 12, and that is "Invalid Argument".
> Ok.
>> It is not clear that a seek to an invalid position in the file
>> is going to succeed. It's also not clear to me that the seek
>> argument isn't 32 bits (depends on complex ugly GNU macro
>> hackery what type off_t is .. my Caml got built with
>> the LARGE_FILE macro thing so it should be 64 bits).
> Shouldn't off_t always be 64 bits on a 64 bit CPU? I only see 
> this problem on x86-64 and Sys.word_size is 64.

This might be, or might be not. "The standard has nothing to say about
this, but usually it's at least long int whatever that is at the
corresponing platform. In contrast, I find in

   external lseek : file_descr -> int -> seek_command -> int = "unix_lseek"

but also in otherlibs/unix/lseek.c

  ret = lseek(Int_val(fd), Long_val(ofs),

(see the Long_Val).

Am I only imagining potential problems with variable width here?

Regards -- Markus