int vs size_t on 64bit

Posted by MK on Stack Overflow See other posts from Stack Overflow or by MK
Published on 2010-03-25T21:15:29Z Indexed on 2010/03/25 21:33 UTC
Read the original article Hit count: 363

Filed under:
|
|

Porting code from 32bit to 64bit. Lots of places with

int len = strlen(pstr);

These all generate warnings now because strlen() returns size_t which is 64bit and int is still 32bit. So I've been replacing them with

size_t len = strlen(pstr);

But I just realized that this is not safe, as size_t is unsigned and it can be treated as signed by the code (I actually ran into one case where it caused a problem, thank you, unit tests!).

Blindly casting strlen return to (int) feels dirty. Or maybe it shouldn't?
So the question is: is there an elegant solution for this? I probably have a thousand lines of code like that in the codebase; I can't manually check each one of them and the test coverage is currently somewhere between 0.01 and 0.001%.

© Stack Overflow or respective owner

Related posts about c

    Related posts about portability