From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B00DF1F42D for ; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 10:03:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752257AbeC0KD3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2018 06:03:29 -0400 Received: from siwi.pair.com ([209.68.5.199]:36224 "EHLO siwi.pair.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751068AbeC0KD1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2018 06:03:27 -0400 Received: from siwi.pair.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by siwi.pair.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F1183F4090; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 06:03:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.1.71] (162-238-212-202.lightspeed.rlghnc.sbcglobal.net [162.238.212.202]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by siwi.pair.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 30B003F408A; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 06:03:26 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v5 0/8] rebase-interactive To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Wink Saville , jeffhost@microsoft.com, Git List , Eric Sunshine , Johannes Schindelin References: <9ca76d31-828d-0b6f-5069-375792c1f55d@jeffhostetler.com> From: Jeff Hostetler Message-ID: Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 06:03:28 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:59.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/59.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 3/27/2018 1:07 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff Hostetler writes: [...] > So I would think it is most sensible to have double, uintmax_t and > intmax_t variants. If you do not care about the extra value range > that unsigned integral types afford, a single intmax_t variant would > also be fine. I'll reroll with just the double and intmax_t variants. Thanks for the feedback and sorry for all the noise. Jeff