range.size() should be long, right?

[Artur Skawina]

On 06/25/12 19:49, Mehrdad wrote:
> Shouldn't the length of a range should be a long?
> 
> Otherwise there's no way we could possibly replace streams with ranges.
> 32-bit systems have LOTS of common streams that are over 2^32 bytes (e.g. DVD images, partition images, large movies, etc.).
> 
> And not just that -- if we use size_t instead of long, bit arrays will only have a maximum length of 512 MiB -- waay lower than what 32-bit systems can handle.
> 

What makes you think 'length' should evaluate to a size_t? If it it's
documented like that somewhere then that should be fixed.

It should be unsigned though, so if you need a type wider than 32-bit
size_t, use ulong etc.

artur